Stray Remarks and Circumstantial Evidence

On January 21, 2010, the Michigan Court of Appeals, in Wolfgang v. Dixie Cut Stone, in addition to providing a succinct overview of prima facie cases, provided yet another valuable precedent for employers trying to discredit plaintiffs' direct evidence claims.

To establish a direct evidence claim, plaintiffs must offer direct evidence of discrimination. If he/she does so, the discrimination case proceeds like any other civil case. In Wolfgang, the Court held that "that was something stupid only a woman would say," "[h]ere we go, Angel, thinking that because I'm a woman I can sell this and . . . it ain't going to sell," and that was "too much money for a woman to make," in addition to calling Plaintiff a "bitch" were mere stray remarks and did not constitute direct evidence of discrimination. The Court also explained away the five examples of differential treatment as not "sufficient circumstantial evidence of gender discrimination."

This case also contains a pro-employer conclusion regarding FMLA retaliation. Specifically, the Court upheld the dismissal of Plaintiff's FMLA-retaliation claim despite evidence that "the human resources department sent threatening letters to plaintiff while she was on leave" because that "evidence does not establish that plaintiff's medical leave was the reason for her termination...."

Click here for a copy of the Court's opinion.