Favorable Court of Appeals rulling leads to trial in age/sex discrimination case
(4)In Barnett v. PA Consulting Grp., Inc., 715 F.3d 354, 360 (D.C. Cir. 2013), the firm successfully overturned the grant of summary judgment to the employer in an age and sex discrimination case against a large international consulting firm. The Court of Appeals determined that there was more than sufficient evidence of age and sex bias to permit a jury to find in Barnett’s favor, and thus require a trial: “Although “we do not routinely require plaintiffs to submit evidence over and above rebutting the employer's stated explanation in order to avoid summary judgment,” id. (citation omitted), Barnett has done that here. She has introduced evidence that PA unlawfully considered age to be a relevant factor in deciding which Transportation Group employees to retain. Barnett points to a spreadsheet produced by COO Tindale's secretary in February 2003 for Tindale and CEO Moynihan in advance of the first meeting they convened about the Group. The spreadsheet includes comments from the authors of the internal audit about the productivity of each employee in the Group. The spreadsheet also reports the age of each employee, including Barnett.”