Opinion ID: 2998787
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Anna Perrey

Text: As to Perrey, Thompson Distribution claims it fired her because she was insubordinate and unwilling to recognize Thompson as the new leader. In his deposition, Thompson stated that when he asked Perrey to perform certain functions, she responded along the lines of “we don’t do it that way,” or stated that she had to check with Mark Hague. In response, Perrey claims that she never refused to follow Thompson’s directions, but rather that she did not know how to perform the tasks Thompson requested and thus she needed to check with Mark Hague for guidance. At most, this means that Thompson was mistaken in his belief that Perrey was being insubordinate. However, as noted above, “[p]retext requires more than showing that the decision was ‘mistaken, ill considered or foolish.’ ” Ballance, 424 F.3d at 617 (quoting Jordan v. Summers, 205 F.3d 337, 343 (7th Cir. 2000). To avoid summary judgment, a plaintiff must present evidence showing that the employer did not honestly believe his proffered reason. Jordan, 205 F.3d at 343. Perrey has not done this. Moreover, the record confirms that Thompson honestly believed that Perrey was being insubordinate. Specifically, in his affidavit, Mark Hague stated that 6 Because Dubois was not replaced, his claim also fails because he lacks evidence that a similarly situated individual outside the protected class was treated more favorably. See, e.g., Gadsby v. Norwalk Furniture Corp., 71 F.3d 1324 (7th Cir. 1995) (holding that the district court properly granted the defendant summary judgment where the plaintiff failed to present evidence that he was replaced by someone outside the protected class). 16 No. 05-1654 Thompson approached him to discuss Perrey’s refusal to follow his directions. Hague further stated that he told Thompson that Perrey just did not know how to do what he was asking her to do. Although Hague did not believe Perrey was being insubordinate, this testimony confirms that Thompson did. Without any evidence of pretext, then, Thompson Distribution was entitled to summary judgment on Perrey’s race discrimination claim, as well.