This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: n. Mar. 21, 2006) (quoting Schreiber v. Woldco, LLC, 324 F.Supp.2d 512,
518-19 (S.D.N.Y.2002)). Henderson claims that Shepard's derogatory remark about
Blaney leaving to "fix her lipstick" when Blaney excused herself from the staff meeting
(dkt. # 44, Henderson Dep., Ex. 8 at 56:6-7) and his comment about Blaney wearing a
skirt and high heels on the factory floor (dkt. # 44, Henderson Dep., Ex. 8 at 40:14-18.)
are not stray remarks. Although it is unclear when the remarks in question were made, the
court finds that taken in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, the remarks 176 were made by a decision-maker, Shepard, and could be viewed as discriminatory. These
remarks, however, are unconnected to both the decision-making process to terminate
Henderson and the adverse employment action that was taken against Henderson.
Shepard made the remarks with respect to Blaney, not Henderson. Further, the remarks
did not relate to Henderson's job performance. In addition, the parties agree that Shepard
did not partake in either the telephone call where Henderson informed Blaney, LaCroix,
and Canova that she no longer wanted to work for the business or the telephone call
where Blaney and LaCroix told Henderson that she could not rescind her resignation.
Lastly, Henderson admits that Shepard alone approved of Blaney and LaCroix's decision
not to allow Henderson to rescind her termination. Accordingly, Shepard's remarks
concerning Blaney qualify as stray remarks, which cannot be used to prove gender
In support of her contention that she was terminated because of her sex, Henderson
argues that GE IMV was referred to as "the company run by women" and that Shepard
replaced four high ranking female executives (Madrisotti, Kasdan, Gawin, and
Henderson) with men during the time period of January 2002 to December 2002. With
respect to her claim that Shepard terminated Madrisotti, Henderson admits that Madrisotti
left the company on her own volition, thus making any claim of an adverse employment
action due to gender discrimination inapplicable to her. [FN8] Additionall...
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.
- Spring '08