Burdine v. Texas Dept. of Community Affairs, 77-1101

Decision Date29 May 1981
Docket NumberNo. 77-1101,77-1101
Citation647 F.2d 513
Parties25 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1746, 26 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 31,898 Joyce Ann BURDINE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Hubert L. Gill, Austin, Tex., for plaintiff-appellant.

Mark White, Atty. Gen. of Texas, Roland Allen, Richard Scott Rafes, Asst. Attys. Gen., Austin, Tex., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before JONES, CHARLES CLARK and GEE, Circuit Judges.

GEE, Circuit Judge:

By its unanimous opinion of March 4, Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, -- U.S. --, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981), the Supreme Court vacated our former judgment herein, explained and corrected two errors of law contained in our prior opinion, 1 and remanded the case to us for further proceedings. We requested further briefing from the parties regarding the effect of the Court's opinion. Those briefs have now come. Like the proverbial bumpkin in the blacksmith's shop, we need not hold this hot horseshoe long in order to inspect it.

As enunciated by the Court, the correct rules of law to be applied in such cases as this are:

(1) In responding to a plaintiff's proof of a prima facie case of employment discrimination, 2 the defendant employer need only produce admissible evidence that would allow the trier of fact rationally to conclude that the employment decision had not been motivated by discriminatory animus. His burden in this respect is one of production only, not one of persuasion. Insofar as our authorities 3 are to the contrary, they must of course yield. To that extent, they are overruled.

(2) Since Title VII "does not require the employer to restructure his employment practices to maximize the number of minorities and women hired," -- U.S. at --, 101 S.Ct. at 1097, 67 L.Ed.2d at 219, the criterion in evaluating employment decisions is equality of employees' objective qualifications, not superiority of those possessed by the preferred employee. Insofar as our authorities 4 can be read as to the contrary, they must yield in this respect as well.

Applying these corrected legal standards to the evidence in this case and to the findings of the district court, we conclude that its judgment was correct and must in all respects be affirmed. That court found that plaintiff Burdine was terminated for the good of the agency and because she and two others also terminated did not work well together and had disagreements. Evidence supporting these findings is present; they are not clearly erroneous. Its finding that plaintiff Burdine was not discriminatorily treated as to compensation must likewise...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • Walker v. Mortham
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • October 28, 1998
    ...was less qualified than the successful applicant to succeed in defending against a Title VII claim. See Burdine v. Texas Dep't of Community Affairs, 647 F.2d 513, 514 (5th Cir.1981) (reiterating the Court's holdings on remand, and explaining how the Court's decision applies to cases in this......
  • Agoh v. Hyatt Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • January 13, 2014
    ...Turner v. Texas Instruments, Inc., 555 F.2d 1251, 1257 (5th Cir.1977), overruled on other grounds, Burdine v. Tex. Dept. of Community Affairs, 647 F.2d 513, 514 n. 3 (5th Cir.1981). Nor does Agoh present competent evidence in his conclusory affidavit to show that the nondiscriminatory reaso......
  • Sherman v. Burke Contracting, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • January 16, 1990
    ...East v. Romine, Inc., 518 F.2d 332, 340 (5th Cir.1975), overruled on other grounds sub nom., Burdine v. Texas Dep't. of Community Affairs, 647 F.2d 513, 514 & n. 4 (5th Cir. May 1981). That provision is contained in section 2000e-3(a), which It shall be an unlawful employment practice for a......
  • E.E.O.C. v. Omni Hotels Management Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • September 26, 2007
    ...EC. Turner v. Texas Instruments, Inc., 555 F.2d 1251, 1256 (5th Cir.1977), overruled in part on other grounds, Burdine v. Texas Dep't of Cmty. Affairs, 647 F.2d 513 (5th Cir.1981) (holding that employer's action based on "honest belief' that the plaintiff violated time card policy did not c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT