Court Opinion

ID: 9471566
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 03:35:51.574342+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:42:28.303225
License: Public Domain

ENGEL, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I agree with the majority here that the issues in this sex discrimination case are essentially factual and subject to the clearly erroneous rule. I disagree, however, that application of the rule compels reversal. In my opinion, the correspondence from Dr. Atherton, and the exchange of correspon*1221dence between Dr. Wiener and the Postal Service occurring between February 10, 1978 and March 21, 1978, taken with the other testimony in the case, sufficiently supports the trial judge’s finding of discrimination. The evidence also supports his conclusion that the proffered nondiscriminatory reasons for placing plaintiff on involuntary pregnancy leave were pretextual.
I would affirm.