Court Opinion

ID: 9490256
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 13:37:44.289942+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:53:58.952939
License: Public Domain

HEANEY, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I would affirm on the basis of the district court’s opinion, which held, in substance, that Kunferman had established a prima facie case of retaliation, but failed to produce any evidence that Ford’s non-discriminatory .explanation for its conduct was pretext for wrongful retaliation. The record supports that Dr. Nesvacil removed Kunferman’s work restrictions based both on his own evaluation of Kunferman and the independent specialist’s written report. Neither doctor was aware that Kunferman had filed either a MOSHA or workers’ compensation complaint. Because I believe we should follow the reasoning of the district court, I simply concur in the result of the majority opinion.