Opinion ID: 2822019
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Exemplary Qualifications

Text: Stennett produced substantial evidence showing her exemplary qualifications for the positions in question: three advanced degrees; four administrative and teaching certifications (two of which were AAA); thirtyeight years of educational experience overall; and twenty years of experience within TPSD. Viewed in the light most favorable to Stennett, the evidence 4 Stennett also argues that TPSD offered inconsistent rationales for its hiring decisions and that this evidence is probative of pretext. While we repeatedly have recognized that inconsistencies in an employer’s purported hiring rationale may evince pretext, see, e.g., Staten v. New Palace Casino, 187 F. App’x 350, 359 (5th Cir. 2006), we need not reach that argument in deciding this case. 5The district court, however, reviewed this evidence in a piecemeal manner rather than considering whether the evidence “as a whole” created a genuine issue as to pretext. See Reeves, 530 U.S. at 151. 13 Case: 13-60783 Document: 00513135322 Page: 14 Date Filed: 07/30/2015 No. 13-60783 showed that, measured in terms of education and experience, Stennett was more qualified than each of the successful younger applicants, except one: Dr. Tanisha Westerfield-Smith. 6 For example, TPSD refused to hire Stennett for the Tupelo High School Testing Coordinator position, 7 selecting instead a substantially younger applicant with only an AA certification and twenty-three fewer years of teaching experience than Stennett. TPSD also selected a substantially younger candidate for the District Testing Coordinator position who had only an AA certification and only half the years of overall teaching experience as Stennett. Similarly, TPSD refused to hire Stennett as the Administrative Intern at Lawhon Elementary School, and instead hired a substantially younger applicant with only an AA certification and ten years of teaching experience. TPSD also refused to hire Stennett for the Assistant Principal position at Lawndale Elementary, instead hiring a substantially younger applicant with only an AA certification and seven years of overall experience. Moreover, although the successful candidate for the Tupelo Middle School Assistant Principal position possessed an AAA certification, he had twenty-five fewer years of teaching experience than Stennett and no prior experience within TPSD. In addition, Stennett produced substantial evidence showing that her experience was directly pertinent to all of the positions in question, whereas some of the successful younger candidates lacked any pertinent experience. For example, although Stennett had served as an administrator for a number 6The evidence showed that Westerfield-Smith had completed a doctorate, but nevertheless had only eleven years of experience overall and one year of experience within TPSD. 7 One of Stennett’s duties at the Fillmore Center had been to serve as the “testing coordinator” for grades 2-12, in which she was “responsible for all the testing, the monitors, getting the tests, securing them, and getting them back to the different schools.” 14 Case: 13-60783 Document: 00513135322 Page: 15 Date Filed: 07/30/2015 No. 13-60783 of years, TPSD refused to hire Stennett for the Administrative Intern position at Lawhon Elementary School. The record reflects that an administrative intern’s primary duties involve assisting the principal and assistant principal with administrative duties. Nevertheless, Christy Carroll, who conducted the interviews for the position, explained that the position’s duties were indistinguishable from an assistant principal’s duties. Yet, notwithstanding the fact that Stennett had served as an assistant principal at the alternative school for several years, Carroll refused to even interview Stennett, and instead hired an individual who lacked any administrative experience at all. Similarly, despite Stennett’s relevant experience as an assistant administrator, TPSD also refused to even interview 8 her for the Assistant Principal position at Lawndale Elementary. Instead, TPSD selected Tyrone Catledge for the job, who was only 29 years old at the time of being hired. Significantly, Catledge also lacked any prior administrative experience, and instead had been teaching “business tech” at Tupelo High School. Indeed, the record reflects that Catledge only received an “entry level administrator” certification in September 2011—after being hired for the position. A reasonable jury could consider the strength of Stennett’s qualifications vis-à-vis the successful younger applicants as undermining the credibility of TPSD’s proffered hiring rationale—i.e., that the younger successful applicants were selected because they were all better qualified than her. Indeed, evidence of a plaintiff’s superior qualifications is directly probative of pretext, Patterson, 491 U.S. at 187, and Stennett need not establish that she was “clearly better qualified” in order for this court to consider her comparatively exemplary qualifications in tandem with the other evidence, outlined infra, supporting 8 The principal who made the ultimate interview decisions could not recall why he did not interview Stennett. 15 Case: 13-60783 Document: 00513135322 Page: 16 Date Filed: 07/30/2015 No. 13-60783 the inference that TPSD’s proffered hiring rationale is pretextual. Pratt v. City of Hous., 247 F.3d 601, 607 (5th Cir. 2001) (holding that plaintiff’s exemplary qualifications in tandem with other evidence created a genuine issue as to pretext); see also Sanders, 108 F. App’x at 146 (same).