CourtCases2010

As dr pirl describes it zihalas failure to report to

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: t it is more likely than [*12] not that her disability was the reason for her discharge. Weigel v. Target Stores, 122 F.3d 461, 465 (1997) (citing Leffel v. Valley Fin. Servs., 113 F.3d 787, 792-794 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 968, 118 S. Ct. 416, 139 L. Ed. 2d 318 (1997)). If the plaintiff can establish a prima face case it raises a presumption of discriminatory motive, and the burden then shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for its decision. DeLuca v. Winer Indus., Inc., 53 F.3d 793, 797 (7th Cir. 1995). If the employer satisfies its burden, the presumption vanishes and the plaintiff must prove that the employer's stated reason is mere pretext masking discriminatory action. Weisbrot v. Medical College of Wisc., 79 F.3d 677, 681 (7th Cir. 1996). In the present case, no genuine factual disputes exist as to two of the four prima facie elements of Zihala's disability discrimination claim. There is no dispute that Zihala suffered an adverse employment action when she was discharged and the Department apparently concedes for purposes of the instant motion that Zihala was "disabled" within the meaning of the ADA. The Department contends, however, that it discharged [*13] Zihala because she was not meeting its legitimate expectations of a Chemist I. The Department argues that Zihala's alleged disability played no role in her discharge as evidenced by the fact that Dr. Pirl was unaware of any disability before he decided to recommend that the Department discharge Zihala. The Department claims that, because its decision to discharge Zihala was based solely on Dr. Pirl's recommendation, it discharged Zihala because of her poor work performance and disruptive behavior. In 187 short, the Department concludes that there is no evidence that it discharged Zihala because of her alleged disability. After a careful review of the record, we find that there is insufficient evidence to enable a reasonable jury to conclude that the Department discharged Zihala because...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online