Opinion ID: 532216
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Race and Sex Discrimination Claims

Text: 9 Dr. Bullock alleges disparate treatment by the defendants in removing her from her administrative position as Director of the Center and in reducing her salary upon her removal. Dr. Bullock first challenges the district court's finding that she has failed to introduce evidence to show that the defendants' nondiscriminatory reasons for her removal were mere pretexts. 1 Defendants' nondiscriminatory reasons for her removal are: (1) the Center failed to meet its benchmarks and the benchmark report contained irregularities, (2) inaccuracies in the Center's proposed budget, and (3) problems with the Center's Special Education and Rehabilitation Component. 10 Dr. Bullock argues that she has presented sufficient evidence to go to trial on whether these reasons were mere pretexts. Dr. Bullock states that she was the only director removed, even though 18 of the 26 Centers failed to meet one or more benchmarks. Dr. Bullock states that of the 26 Centers for Excellence, she was the only black director and the only female director with two years experience. She also alleges that no determination had been made as to whether her Center had met its benchmarks at the time she was removed. 11 These facts are insufficient to make a showing that the defendants' reasons are merely pretexts. First, Dr. Bullock has addressed only the Center's failure to meet its benchmarks, not the other reasons for her removal. Second, Dr. Bullock's comparisons to the other Centers have little relevance because the other directors were under different supervisors. President Floyd and Vice-president Cox of Tennessee State, who were responsible for her removal, did not have authority over the directors of other Centers for Excellence. Because she has failed to present evidence that could show that the defendants' reasons for her dismissal were merely pretexts, summary judgment was appropriate. 12 Dr. Bullock also contends that she received disparate treatment in the reduction of her salary. Dr. Bullock advances several reasons why her salary was reduced either wrongly or by too much after her removal from the directorship of the Center. However, Dr. Bullock fails to show how the reduction, even if incorrect, stemmed from race or sex discrimination. Although Dr. Bullock stated in her deposition that she knew of white males who received smaller salary reductions after demotions, she cited only one example and failed to proffer any evidence more substantial than inadmissible, conclusory allegations. Thus, her claim cannot survive the defendant's motion for summary judgment.