{"id":1359,"date":"2020-02-27T19:39:58","date_gmt":"2020-02-27T19:39:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.bfvlaw.com\/how-do-you-prove-a-wrongful-termination-claim\/"},"modified":"2023-03-21T17:05:54","modified_gmt":"2023-03-21T17:05:54","slug":"how-do-you-prove-a-wrongful-termination-claim","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bfvlaw.com\/how-do-you-prove-a-wrongful-termination-claim\/","title":{"rendered":"How Do you Prove a Wrongful Termination Claim?"},"content":{"rendered":"\r\n

Do I have a wrongful termination claim? This is often the first question an employee asks when they lose a job. This is especially true if the employee feels blindsided or otherwise treated unfairly.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Generally, wrongful termination claims are based on either: (1) an alleged breach of an employment contract; or (2) alleged discrimination under various federal or state laws, which\u00a0 prohibit terminations based on numerous categories such as age, race, sex, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, disability and national origin to name few.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Legal Cases Illustrate Wrongful Termination Claims<\/strong>
Whether a party can establish a wrongful termination claim under either of these theories may ultimately depend on whether the employee can show that he\/she was treated less favorably than a similarly situated employee or \u201ccomparator.\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Some recent legal cases illustrate the relevance of such \u201ccomparator evidence\u201d in wrongful termination claims and how the courts determine who qualifies as a comparator. \u00a0<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Comparator Evidence in Breach of Contract Context
<\/strong>The University of Kansas athletics department was recently ordered to produce information to a former football coach suing the University for breach of an employment contract.\u00a0<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

David Beaty<\/a>, a former University of Kansas football coach, filed a complaint against the University alleging that the school fabricated a reason for terminating his employment for cause to avoid paying him a $3M severance. Although Beaty was initially told his employment was being terminated without cause, the University changed course and refused to pay the severance after it discovered the football program was under NCCA investigation over the conduct of a football staff member.\u00a0<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

To show that the University willfully breached his contract, Beaty propounded discovery to the University directed at eliciting information about other NCAA violations by head coaches and the resulting treatment of the coaches. Beaty claims that no other head coaches had their pay suspended or were fired despite the presence of NCAA violations, including the basketball coach who is the focus of a federal corruption probe. The University objected to producing this comparator evidence, forcing the court to resolve the discovery dispute.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Th court granted Beaty\u2019s request for the comparator information and the University was compelled to produce, among other things, the University\u2019s actions and employment decisions related to the \u00a0basketball scandal and federal corruption probe that featured references to multiple Kansas basketball coaches who are still employed by the University. \u00a0In reaching its decision, the Court reasoned:
\u201cGiven the claims and defenses in this case, it is not far-fetched to believe a reasonable jury might find Beaty\u2019s conduct did not constitute a true default of his employment contract because defendant did not consider similar actions by other coaches a default.\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Comparator Evidence in Discrimination Context: Who is Similarly Situated?
<\/strong>Generally, a plaintiff can prove discrimination based on either direct or circumstantial evidence.\u00a0 To assess a discrimination claim\u00a0based only on circumstantial evidence, a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination by proving four elements: (1) that she belongs to a protected class; (2) that she was subjected to an adverse employment action; (3) that she was qualified to perform the job in question; and (4) that the employer treated \u201csimilarly situated\u201d employees outside her class more favorably.\u00a0 See<\/em> Lewis v. City of Union City, Ga.<\/em>, 918 F.3d 1213, 1220-21 (11th Cir. 2019). Thus, identifying comparators who are similarly situated is critical to establishing a discrimination claim.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

In Lewis<\/em>, an African American female detective who was fired because her health condition prevented her from undergoing required pepper spray testing, claimed her termination was discriminatorily based on her race, gender and disability.\u00a0 To support her discrimination claims, she identified two white male police officers (comparators) who also failed fitness for duty tests but were afforded more opportunities to correct their failures and obtain alternative employment with the city.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

In evaluating her comparator evidence, the Eleventh Circuit explained that \u201csimilarly situated\u201d means \u201csimilarly situated in all material aspects.\u201d \u00a0According to the Court, precisely what sort of similarity the standard entails will be worked out on a case-by-case basis, in the context of individual circumstances.\u00a0 The court did provide some guideposts.\u00a0 Ordinarily, a similarly situated comparator:<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n