 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bormann v. Opus Northwest3/9/1999
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. ยง 480A.08, subd. 3 (1998).
Affirmed Crippen, Judge
Appellant Bridget Bormann challenges the trial court's summary judgment in favor of respondent, her employer, in an action alleging employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and constructive discharge. We affirm.
FACTS
In 1996, appellant, a senior secretary in the real estate department at Opus Northwest, began to ask various managers at Opus whether there were opportunities for her to advance within the company. Opus hired Daniel Queenan as a real estate representative in April 1997.
Appellant argues that the Queenan hiring was discriminatory and also contends that vice president Murnane sexually harassed her, conduct that she says worsened and accelerated after Queenan was hired. The alleged behavior includes attempted kisses, suggestive comments, and unwanted physical contact. While on vacation in June 1997, appellant phoned Opus president Rauenhorst to discuss Murnane's behavior. Rauenhorst said he would look into the matter and have vice president Heller call her back. Heller called the next day and apologized to appellant on behalf of both Opus and Murnane, told appellant that Opus took the alleged incidents seriously, and promised to do further investigation into the incident. Heller also told appellant that she could be reassigned so that she would not have to work directly with Murnane. After this telephone conversation, appellant never returned to work. Instead, she resigned on June 26, 1997.
Appellant commenced this lawsuit after leaving Opus, alleging gender discrimination and sexual harassment in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 363 (1998), and constructive discharge. The trial court entered a final judgment granting Opus's motion for summary judgment.
DECISION
On appeal from summary judgment, this court asks two questions: (1) whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and (2) whether the trial court erred in its application of the law. State by Cooper v. French, 460 N.W.2d 2, 4 (Minn. 1990). While this court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, the non-movant must produce specific facts that create an issue for trial. Nicollet Restoration, Inc. v. City of St. Paul, 533 N.W.2d 845, 848 (Minn. 1995).
Gender Discrimination
For employment discrimination cases, the three-step McDonnell Douglas test requires that the courts determine if the plaintiff has proven by the preponderance of the evidence a prima facie case of discrimination; if this is done, whether the defendant can meet a burden to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its action; and if this burden is carried, whether the plaintiff can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the purported nondiscriminatory reasons are not the true explanation for the action but were a pretext for discrimination. Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 252-53, 101 S. Ct. 1089, 1093 (1981). The trial court was correct in finding that appellant had introduced neither direct nor indirect evidence establishing a prima facie case of discrimination.
A prima facie case of employment discrimination may be established by direct evidence of discrimination. Sigurdson v. Isanti County, 386 N.W.2d 715, 720 (Minn. 1986). Appellant contends that Heller's statements to her about her chances for advancement within Opus rise to the level of direct evidence of sex discrimination. Heller apparently told appellant during a January 1997 performance review that "it was too difficul
Page 1 2 3 Minnesota Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|