Opinion ID: 604145
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Shifting Burdens in ADEA Claims

Text: 9 The litany of cases in this court establishing the alternating burdens to be carried by the parties to an age discrimination case, like the litany of those creating our standard of review for grants of summary judgment, is a long and well established one. As there is no direct evidence of age discrimination in the instant case, a three step analysis applies. 11 In the first step, the plaintiff must prove a prima facie case by demonstrating that he or she was (1) discharged; (2) qualified for the position; (3) within the protected age class--over 40--at the time of discharge; and (4) replaced by someone outside of the protected age class--under 40--or was otherwise discharged because of his or her age. 12 10 By proving a prima facie case, the employee establishes a rebuttable presumption that the employer unlawfully discriminated against the employee. The employer may then negate this presumption by articulating a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for its action. If the employer articulates such a reason, and on summary judgment produces sufficient evidence to support the reason thus articulated, the burden reverts to the plaintiff to prove that the employer's reason[ ] [is] pretextual. 13 The plaintiff can show pretext by introducing evidence which proves that the reason stated by the employer, 'though facially adequate, was untrue as a matter of fact or was, although true, a mere cover or pretext' for illegal discrimination. 14 Stated another way, the plaintiff may prove pretext by either showing that a discriminatory reason motivated the defendant or by showing that the proffered reason is unworthy of credence. 15 11 To overcome a motion for summary judgment, of course, the plaintiff need only produce evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact concerning pretext. 16 It is clear, however, that the plaintiff's summary judgment proof must consist of more than a mere refutation of the employer's legitimate nondiscriminatory reason. 17 To demonstrate pretext, the plaintiff must do more than cast doubt on whether [the employer] had just cause for its decision; he or she must show that a reasonable factfinder could conclude that [the employer's] reason[ ] [is] unworthy of credence. 18 Specifically, [t]here must be some proof that age motivated the employer's action, otherwise the law has been converted from one preventing discrimination because of age to one ensuring dismissals only for just cause to all people over 40. 19