Opinion ID: 2582271
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Departing from Our Prior Cases To Set a Higher Threshold Is Likely To Discourage Meritorious Discrimination Claims.

Text: By failing to apply consistently our summary judgment standard, the court not only creates a conflict with existing case law, but also sets a precedent that could deter meritorious claims in the future. Discrimination cases, including claims of harassment and wrongful termination, often turn on subtle questions of credibility and intent that only a factfinder faced with a live witness should decide. [18] The evidence in these cases, which may consist primarily of the testimony of the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator, is likely to contain conflicting claims, and is likely to be susceptible to different interpretations, depending on which inferences the factfinder draws. For this reason, discrimination claimsincluding claims that might prevail if allowed to proceedare particularly vulnerable to summary judgment if courts improperly weigh the credibility of evidence, fail to draw reasonable inferences in favor of the non-moving party, or decide outright the ultimate questions of fact. As several scholars have noted, this makes it significantly more difficult for victims of discrimination to seek redress, even when the law grants them a cause of action. [19] Thus, by deterring meritorious discrimination claims, the court's departure from precedent is likely to have pernicious effects that go far beyond this particular case.