Divided appeals court makes dismissal before trial even less likely for employers

Getting an employment case dismissed before trial has always been tricky in Massachusetts state courts, but if a recent ruling by a divided appeals court panel stands as written, it just became even more difficult. Here’s what happened.

Quick overview

A trial court granted summary judgment (dismissal without a trial) in favor of the employer in an age discrimination case filed by an employee whose job was eliminated as part of a reduction in force (RIF), but the appeals court reversed the decision. It reasoned sufficient evidence existed for a reasonable jury to conclude the RIF was intended to further a corporate plan to replace aging workers.

In a blistering dissent, however, two of the judges accused the majority of misunderstanding the appropriate legal standard, disregarding undisputed evidence of the employer’s legitimate reasons for the decision, improperly crediting flawed opinions offered by an expert witness, changing established law regarding “stray remarks” in the workplace, and other errors. It’s rare to see appeals court judges disagree so vigorously.

Long-serving engineer’s position eliminated in RIF

From 2007 until January 2017, Mark Adams was employed by Schneider Electric USA as an electrical engineer in the research and development division at its Boston campus. For several years, his work involved improving the quality of batteries, but in 2016, he was moved to a different project.