FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT DEC 03, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 11948 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 04 -000 71 -C V -W L S -6 C A R A H A N K I N S O N , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s T H O M A S C O U N T Y S C H O O L S Y S T E M , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e M id d le D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( D e c e m b e r 3, 2007) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B A R K E T T an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: C ar a H anki nson fi l ed a c om pl ai nti n the di stri ctcourtal l egi ng thatshe w as2

f i r e d f r om he rpos i t i on a s va r s i ty s of tba l l c oa c h a tT hom a s C ounty H i gh S c hool b a s e d o n h e rs e x , in v io la tio n o f T itle V I I o f

th e C iv il R ig h ts A c t o f 1 9 6 4 ( “T itle V I I ” ) , 42 U . S . C . § 2000e - 2. S he l a t e ra m e nde d he rc om pl a i nta l l e gi ng thateven though the s of

tba l l a nd ba s e ba l l c oa c hi ng pos i t i ons w e r e s ubs t a nt i a l l y s i m i l a r , s he w as pai d l es s than the m al e bas ebal l coac h, i n v i ol at i on of the E qu al P ayA ct (“ E P A ”) , 29 U . S . C . § 2 06 (d). H anki nson , throu gh coun se l , appeal s the di stri ct court ’ s grantof sum m ary j ud gm enton bo th o f these cl ai m s i n favor of her em pl oyer , T ho m as C ou nty S choo l S ys t em (“ T ho m as C ou nty” ). I . B AC KG R OU ND H anki nson coac hed the hi gh sc ho ol gi rl s s oftbal l t ea m fr om 20 00 t o 2 00 3. In 20 02 , T ho m as C ou nty a dm i ni stra t ors began rec ei vi ng com pl ai nt s abo uther pe r f orm a nc e a s ac oa c h. O n J a nua ry 29, 2003, s he w a s a dvi s e d i n w r i t i ng by a d m in is tr a to r s o f

h e rn e e d to im p r o v e h e rp e r f o rm a n c e ; th e le tte ro u tlin e d s p e c if ic be ha vi or s f

orH a nki ns on t o a voi d, s uc h a s m a ki ng di s pa r a gi ng r e m a rks aboutthe pl ay er s. A s are sul tof the com pl ai nt s and pres sure fr om se vera l bo ar d m em bers w hos e r e l a t i ve s w e r e on the s of tba l l t e a m , H a nki ns on w a s f i r e d i n l a t e 2003. S he cl ai m s that(1) s he w as fi re d b ec ause of her s ex and (2) she re ce i ved a l ow ersa l ary th a n th e m a le b a s e b a ll c o a c h b e c au s e s h e is f e m a le . T he di s tr i c tc ourtgr a nt e d s um m a ry j udgm e ntf orT hom a s C ounty on3

H a n k in s o n ’s E P A a n d T itle V I I c la im s . S h e ap p e a ls . I I . ST AN DA RD OF RE VI EW “W e r e v ie w th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s g r a n t o f s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t de no vo , ap p ly in g th e s a m e le g a l s ta n d a r d s th a t b o u n d th e d is tr ic t c o u rt, a n d ‘v ie w in g a ll f a c t s a nd r e a s onabl e i nf

e r e nc e s i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o the nonm ovi ng party. ’ ” Cruz v . P ub l i

x Sup erM

kt s. , Inc. , 428 F . 3d 1379, 1382 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ( quot i ng S tr i c kla n d

v . Wa te rWo rk

s a n d Se w e rB d. o

f B i rmi n g h a m, 239 F . 3d 1199, 1 2 0 3 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 1 )). S u m m ary j u d g m en ti s ap p ro p ri at e w h ere “th e p l ead i n g s, de pos i t i ons , a ns w e r s t o i nt e rr oga t or i e s , a nd a dm i s s i ons on f i l e , t oge the rw i th the a f f i da vi t s , i f

a ny , s how tha tthe r e i s no ge nui ne i s s ue a s t o a ny m a t e r i a l f a c ta nd th a tth e mo v i n g p a rty i s e n t i t l e d t o j u d g me n ta s ama tt e ro f l a w . ” Fe d . R. Ci v . P. 5 6 ©. I I I . DI S C US S I ON A . E qu alP ay A ct A n em pl oyee es t abl i shes a p r im a fa c ie c a s e of a n E P A vi ol a t i on “ by s how i ng tha tthe e m pl oy e rpa i d e m pl oy e e s of oppos i t e ge nde r s di f

f e r e ntw a ge s f

or equal w ork for j ob s w hi ch re qu i re equal ski l l , ef fort , and res po nsi bi l i ty, and w hi ch ar e per form ed un der s i m i l arw orki ng cond i t i on s. ” Stege rv . G e n. E le c . C o. , 318 F . 3d 1066, 1077- 78 ( 11th C i r . 2003) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a rks om i tt e d) ( quot i ng4

Ir by v. B i t t i ck

, 44 F . 3d 949, 954 ( 11th C i r . 1995) ) . T he j obs ne e d onl y be

“ subst ant i al l y s i m i l ar , ” and w hen com pari ng them w e f ocus “ sol el y on the pri m ary dut i e s of e a c h j ob, notdut i e s tha ta r e i nc i de nt a l ori ns ubs t a nt i a l , a nd, a l though fo rm al j o b t i t l es o r d escri p t i o n s m ay b e co n si d ered , th e co n tro l l i n g fact o r . . . m u st be ac tual j ob cont ent . ” A r r in g to n v . C o b b C o u n ty , 13 9 F . 3d 86 5, 87 6 (11 th C i r. 1 9 9 8 ) ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s o m itte d ) . O nce a p r im a fa c ie case i s est ab l i sh ed , t o av o i d l i ab i l i ty th e em p l o yer m u st p r o v e th a t th e p a y d if

f e r e n tia l is ju s tif

ie d b y o n e o f

f o u re x c e p tio n s : “( I ) as e n io r ity s y s t e m ; ( i i ) am e r i ts y s t e m ; ( i i i ) as y s t e m w hi c h m e a s ur e s e a rni ngs by qua nt i ty or qu al i ty of produ ct i on ; or (i v) a di ff er ent i al base d o n any other f ac t or other than se x. ” I r by , 4 4 F .3 d a t 9 5 4 ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s o m itte d ) ( q u o tin g 2 9 U .S .C . § 206( d) ( 1) ) . T he e m pl oy e r ’ s bur de n a tthi s poi nti s ahe a vy one ; the s e e xc e pt i ons c ons t i tut e a f

f i rm a t i ve de f

e ns e s a nd m us tbe pr ove d by apr e ponde r a nc e of the e v id e n c e . Mulha l l

v. A dvan ce Sec. , Inc. , 19 F . 3d 58 6, 59 0-91 (11th C i r. 19 94 ). T he di stri ctcourtfoun d thatH anki nson w as un abl e t o est abl i sh a p r im a fa c ie c a s e u n d e rth e E P A . I n g r a n tin g s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t f o rT h o m a s C o u n ty o n th is gr ound, the di s tr i c tc ourtne c e s s a r i l y f ound tha tH a nki ns on f

a i l e d t o r a i s e age nui ne is s u e o f m a te r ia l f

a c t a s to w h e th e rc o a c h in g s o f tb a ll w a s s u b s ta n tia lly s im ila rto c o a c h in g b a s e b a ll.5

I n Mi randa v. B & B C ash G roce ryStore, Inc. , 97 5 F . 2d 15 18 (11th C i r. 1 9 9 2 ) , w e c o n s id e r e d th e is s u e o f w h e th e raf

e m a le p la in tif

f a n d h e rm a le c o w o rk e r , w h o w e r e b o th e m p lo y e d a s b u y e r s f o rag r o c e ry s to r e , h a d s u b s ta n tia lly s im ila rjo b s f

o rp u rp o s e s o f

th e E P A . I

d. a t 1 5 2 4 . T h e p a rtie s a g r e e d th a t th e m a le w as i ni t i al l y r es po nsi bl e f or orderi ng m ore produ ct s, m ore oft en, bu tthey d is a g r e e d a s to w h e th e rth e o v e r a ll r e s p o n s ib ilitie s w e r e s u b s ta n tia lly e q u a l. I d. T he di s tr i c tc ourtgr a nt e d s um m a ry j udgm e ntf orthe e m pl oy e r , butw e r e ve r s e d, hol di ng tha tthe r e w a s age nui ne i s s ue of m a t e r i a l f

a c ta s t o the s i m i l a r i ty of the j obs be c aus e r e a s onabl e m i nds c oul d di f f e ron the i nf

e r e nc e s a r i s i ng f

r om the u n d is p u te d f

a c ts . I d. a t 1 5 3 4 . H e r e , H a nki ns on c onc e de d tha tthe r e w e r e c e rt a i n di f f e r e nc e s be tw e e n the s of tba l l a nd ba s e ba l l t e a m s , f ore xa m pl e : the ba s e ba l l t e a m pl a y e d at ot a l of thi rt ee n m ore gam es than the softbal l t ea m , the base bal l t ea m had fi ve t o t en m ore pl ay er s than the softbal l t ea m , and b as ebal l gam es t ended t o run l on ger than s of tba l l ga m e s . O n the othe rha nd, H a nki ns on a l s o pr oduc e d e vi de nc e tha tthe b aseb al l co ach h ad m o re q u al i fi ed assi st an t s th an sh e d i d , o ffsett i n g th ese di f f e r e nc e s . B e c aus e r e a s onabl e m i nds c oul d di f f e ra s t o w he the rthe tw o pos i t i ons w e r e s u b s ta n tia lly s im ila r , ag e n u in e is s u e o f m a te r ia l f

a c t e x is ts . Se e id . M oreover, the part i es ra i se genu i ne i ss ues of f ac tas t o w hether f

i el d m ai nt enance6

a nd ge ne r a t i on of

r e ve nue w e r e pr i m a ry dut i e s of the ba s e ba l l c oa c h. S uc h a d is tin c tio n is m a te r ia l b e c au s e , to th e e x te n t th a t th e y w e r e n o t p r im a ry d u tie s , it wa s i m p r o p e rf

o rth e d i s tr i c tc o u rtt o c o n s i d e rth e m i n d e t e rm i n i n g wh e th e rth e two c o a c h in g p o s itio n s w e r e s u b s ta n tia lly s im ila r . Se e i d. a t 1 5 3 3 . B ec ause a r ea sonabl e j ury c ou l d i nferthatthe tw o p osi t i on s w er e subst ant i al l y s i m i l arfor purpo se s of the E P A , i tw as i m prop erfor the di stri ctcourt t o g rantsum m ary j ud gm entbase d o n H anki nson ’ s f ai l ure t o est abl i sh a p r im a fa c ie ca se . W e w i l l no taddres s w hether T ho m as C ou nty has suff i ci ent l y e st abl i shed an af fi rm at i ve defense un der one of the four except i on s, as the nei ther T ho m as C ounty northe di s tr i c tc ourte xpl or e d thi s i s s ue . A c c or di ngl y , w e r e ve r s e a nd r e m a n d f o rf u rth e rp r o c e e d i n g s b e l o w. B . T i t le V II T i t l e V I I pr ohi bi t s a n e m pl oy e rf r om di s c r i m i na t i ng a ga i ns ta n i ndi vi dua l on the basi s of “ ra ce , col or, re l i gi on , se x, or nat i on al ori gi n. ” 42 U . S . C . § 2 00 3-2. In a di sc ri m i nat i on ca se , the pl ai nt i ff carr i es the i ni t i al bu rden of es t abl i shi ng a p r i ma f aci e c a s e o f

d is c r im in a tio n . McD on nel l D ou glas C orp. v. G re en , 411 U . S . 792, 802, 93 S . C t . 1817, 1824, 36 L . E d. 2d 668 ( 1973) . H e r e , H a nki ns on r e l i e s on c ir c u m s ta n tia l e v id e n c e to s u p p o rt h e rc la im o f g e n d e rd is c r im in a tio n ; p u r s u a n t to ac o m m o n m e th o d o f

e s tab lis h in g ap r im af

a c ie c a s e , s h e a tte m p ts to s h o w th a t:7

(1 ) sh e b el o n g s t o a p ro t ect ed cl ass; (2 ) sh e w as su b j ect ed t o an ad v erse e m pl oy m e nta c t i on; ( 3) he re m pl oy e rtr e a t e d s i m i l a r l y s i tua t e d e m pl oy e e s out s i de h e rc la s s if

ic a tio n m o r e f

a v o r ab ly ; a n d ( 4 ) s h e w a s q u a lif ie d to d o th e jo b . H

o lifie ld v . R e no , 1 1 5 F .3 d 1 5 5 5 , 1 5 6 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 7 ) ( p e rc u r ia m ) . O nce apl ai nt i ff

has e st abl i shed a p r im a fa c ie c a s e of di s c r i m i na t i on, the bu rden then shi ft s t o the em pl oyert o o ff era “ l egi t i m at e, no nd i sc ri m i nat ory r e a s o n ” f o rits d e c is io n . I

d. at15 64 . If

the em pl oyerm ee t s thi s burden, the bu rden shi ft s bac k t o the pl ai nt i ff t o sho w thatthe em pl oyer ’ s proff er ed re as on w as p r e te x tu a l. McD onne l l

D ouglas , 4 1 1 U .S . a t 8 0 4 , 9 3 S . C t. a t 1 8 2 5 . I n o r d e rto p r o v e p r e te x t, th e p la in tif f m u s t “c o m e f

o rw a r d w ith e v id e n c e . . . s uf f i c i e ntt o pe rm i tar e a s onabl e f a c t f i nde rt o c onc l ude tha tthe r e a s ons gi ve n by th e e m p lo y e rw e r e n o t th e r e a l r e a s o n s f o rth e a d v e r s e e m p lo y m e n t d e c is io n .” Wa s c u r a v . C i t

y o f So u th Mi a mi , 25 7 F . 3d 12 38 , 12 43 (11th C i r. 20 01 ) ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). T he pl ai nt i ff m ustshow bo th thatthe re as on w as fa l se , a n d th a t d is c r im in a tio n w a s th e tru e r e a s o n . B r ook s v . C ount

y C om m ’ n of J e ffe rs o n C o u n ty , 4 4 6 F .3 d 1 1 6 0 , 1 1 6 3 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . I f th e p r o f f e r e d r e a s o n is

“ on e thatm i gh tm ot i vat e are as on abl e e m pl oyer , ” the pl ai nt i ff m ust“ m ee ti thead on and rebuti t . ” W

i l son v. B/ EA er ospa ce, Inc. , 37 6 F . 3d 10 79 , 10 88 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ) .8

A s s um i ng ar

gue ndo thatH anki nson pres ent ed a p r im a fa c ie c a s e u n d e rT itle V II , she di d n otpres entevi dence t o rebutT ho m as C ou nty’ s l egi t i m at e, nondi s c r i m i na t oryr e a s on f orf i r i ng he r , na m e l y tha ti tha d r e c e i ve d num e r ous c o m p la in ts ab o u t h e rp e r f o rm a n c e a s s o f

tb a ll c o a c h . I n d e e d , H a n k in s o n h e r s e lf be l i e ve d tha tc om pl a i nt s f r om one pa rt i c ul a rpl a y e r ’ s pa r e nt s w e r e the dr i vi ng f or c e be hi nd he rf

i r i ng. A ddi t i ona l l y , s he a dm i tt e d r e c e i vi ng tw o a nony m ous c om pl a i ntl e tt e r s a nd ha vi ng apr obl e m w i th a nothe rpa r e nt . F ur the rm or e , m onths b e f o r e h e rte rm in a tio n , s h e w a s in f o rm e d in w r itin g th a t h e rp e r f o rm a n c e h a d to i m prov e, and w as gi ven a l i stof spec i fi c behavi ors t o avo i d. F i nal l y, af t er H a nki ns on w a s f

i r e d, T hom a s C ounty i ni t i a l l y of f e r e d the s of

tba l l c oa c hi ng pos i t i on t o a nothe rf

e m a l e . I n l i ghtof

the f or e goi ng, H a nki ns on f

a i l e d t o r e but T h o m a s C o u n ty ’s le g itim a te n o n d is c r im in a to ry r e a s o n f o rf ir in g h e r , a n d s h e d id no tpres entany e vi dence thatw ou l d p erm i ta r ea sonabl e f ac t fi nd ert o con cl ud e that s h e w a s f ir e d b e c au s e o f

h e rg e n d e r . See B rooks , 4 4 6 F .3 d a t 1 1 6 3 . I V. C ON C L US I ON A c c o r d in g ly , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o rr e c tly g r a n te d s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t to Th o ma s Co u n ty o n H a n k i n s o n ’ s Ti t l e V I I c l a i m, a n d w e a f f i rm a s t o th a tc l a i m. W e r e ve r s e , how e ve r , the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s gr a ntof s um m a ry j udgm e nton H a n k in s o n ’s E P A c la im , a n d r e m a n d f o rf u rth e rp r o c e e d in g s in th e d is tr ic t c o u rt. A FFI R M ED I N PA R T; R EVER SED A N D R EM A N D ED I N PA R T.