Court Opinion

ID: 9736727
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:04:10.084987+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:27:08.444430
License: Public Domain

J. H. Gillis, J.
(dissenting). I must dissent. The evidence presented a question of fact for the jury. The jury determined that plaintiff carried her burden of proof. Neither the trial court nor this Court may substitute its judgment for that of the jury.
The majority opinion suggests that plaintiffs lack of shorthand skills supports its position that the layoff and discharge were not the result of age discrimination. In this regard the majority points out that plaintiffs replacement took shorthand "at least twice during [a] 30-day period”. Such marginal use of an allegedly necessary skill suggests to me the very evidence from which a jury could find that the shorthand requirement was a pretext.