Opinion ID: 791166
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Culver's Refusal to Answer Schroeder's Question

Text: 21 Insubordination is defined as willful disregard of an employer's instructions or an act of disobedience to proper authority. BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 814 (8th ed.2004). Culver's undisputed refusal to answer Schroeder's request for information appears to qualify as disobedience or defiance even if about a relatively trivial matter. 22 Gorman, however, did not refer to this incident as an example of insubordination until filing its summary judgment motion. This was only after Culver mentioned the matter in her deposition. Schroeder failed to mention any specific instances of insubordination at the time of the firing; he later at his deposition, when asked to identify all incidents of Culver's insubordination, failed to mention this matter. This failure to earlier mention the incident as a reason for termination is evidence of pretext. See Emmel v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Chi., 95 F.3d 627, 634 (7th Cir.1996) (affirming a jury's factual determination that defendant's nondiscriminatory reason for its hiring decision was pretextual in part because it was not put forth upon the plaintiff's initial inquiry). When he terminated Culver, Schroeder referred only to issues which would be discussed at an exit interview (which never took place). Gorman's response to Culver's application for unemployment benefits was similarly vague—referring only to performance issues. 23