Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div. of Kraftco Corp., 73-3246
Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
Citation | 501 F.2d 84 |
Docket Number | No. 73-3246,73-3246 |
Parties | 11 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 128, 8 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 749, 10 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,399, 8 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9691 A. P. WILSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEALTEST FOODS DIVISION OF KRAFTCO CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. |
Decision Date | 19 September 1974 |
Page 84
8 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 749,
10 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,399,
8 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9691
v.
SEALTEST FOODS DIVISION OF KRAFTCO CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 13, 1974.
Page 85
Jere D. McWinn, Jacksonville, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.
Guy O. Farmer, II, Gary P. Sams, James A. Bledsoe, Jr., Jacksonville, Fla., Robert G. Johnson, Janet Skaare Morris, Glenview, Ill., for defendant-appellee.
Before BROWN, Chief Judge, TUTTLE, Circuit Judge, and YOUNG, District judge.
JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge:
Appellant, A. P. Wilson, brought this suit under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C.A. 621 et seq. 1 alleging that his employer, the Sealtest Foods Division of Kraftco Corporation, unlawfully discharged him because of his age. At the conclusion of the presentation of Appellant's case, the District Court granted the employer's motion for a directed verdict. Appellant challenges this finding as well as the District Court's refusal to admit into evidence his testimony and that of certain Sealtest employees relating to statements made by company supervisors concerning hiring policies and job openings. We reverse.
Briefly, the facts are that Appellant Wilson had been employed by Sealtest at its Jacksonville, Florida location for thirty-three years, the last twenty-two of them consecutively. During this time he worked at various company jobs beginning as a special delivery salesman of dairy products and working his way up to the position of accounting clerk in 1970. In April of 1970, Appellant was told by his supervisor that Sealtest was gradually closing down its accounting offices in Jacksonville as well as other locations and that if Appellant desired continuous employment with the company he could become a production clerk in Sealtest's Jacksonville warehouse. Appellant Wilson told his supervisor he had no experience as a production clerk but his supervisor assured him that was of no consequence and that he would be given time enough to learn the job. Several months after joining the production department, Appellant was told by his supervisor he was doing a good job.
Page 86
On July 14, 1972, Appellant, who was then sixty-two years of age, was told by several company supervisors that the company had made a job survey and determined they would have to ask Appellant to take an early retirement effective August 5. Appellant testified he had never indicated to the company that early retirement was his desire but that he felt compelled to agree with the company's suggestion. He was soon replaced by Joe Brown, a fifty year old accounting clerk who had been transferred to the Production Department several months prior to Appellant's dismissal.
There has been much debate in both briefs and argument as to whether the recent Supreme Court case of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 1973, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668, which outlines the elements of proof necessary to a prima facie case of racial discrimination under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, has significant relevance to the present case. Appellant argues that any analogous showing that the employee was within the protected age group (40-60), was doing satisfactory work, was terminated without adequate explanation and replaced by a younger man, is sufficient to preclude a judge from directing a verdict against a plaintiff at the close of his case. Once such a showing is made, the burden then shifts to the employer to present some reasonable...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mikkelsen v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1 of Kittitas Cnty., 93731-1.
...the plaintiff " ‘was replaced by a younger person.’ " Id. at 892, 568 P.2d 764 (quoting Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div. of Kraftco Corp., 501 F.2d 84, 86 (5th Cir. 1974) ).404 P.3d 472¶ 31 Since Roberts , we have used the same formulation for age discrimination and other contexts. See, e.g., ......
-
Mikkelsen v. Pub. Util. Dist. # 1 of Kittitas Cnty., 33528–3–III
...work, and was replaced by a younger person....’ ” Id. at 892, 568 P.2d 764 (quoting Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div. of Kraftco Corp., 501 F.2d 84, 86 (5th Cir. 1974) ).¶46 Nine years later, relying on Roberts, our Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of a plaintiff's age discrimination 195 Wash.A......
-
Gelof v. Papineau, Civ. A. No. 83-210 CMW.
...duties at the OMBP with sufficient confidence to "justify some explanation on the part of the employer." Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div., 501 F.2d 84, 87 (5th Cir.1974). This is all the more true because defendant concedes that 80% of the duties of Clendaniel as Director of DDO were devoted t......
-
Thornbrough v. Columbus and Greenville R. Co., 84-4410
...(1984). 12 In certain instances, we have relaxed this test even further. For example, in Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div. of Kraftco Corp., 501 F.2d 84 (5th Cir.1974), we reversed a directed verdict in favor of the employer, even though the plaintiff was replaced simply by a younger person, no......
-
Mikkelsen v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1 of Kittitas Cnty., 93731-1.
...the plaintiff " ‘was replaced by a younger person.’ " Id. at 892, 568 P.2d 764 (quoting Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div. of Kraftco Corp., 501 F.2d 84, 86 (5th Cir. 1974) ).404 P.3d 472¶ 31 Since Roberts , we have used the same formulation for age discrimination and other contexts. See, e.g., ......
-
Mikkelsen v. Pub. Util. Dist. # 1 of Kittitas Cnty., 33528–3–III
...work, and was replaced by a younger person....’ ” Id. at 892, 568 P.2d 764 (quoting Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div. of Kraftco Corp., 501 F.2d 84, 86 (5th Cir. 1974) ).¶46 Nine years later, relying on Roberts, our Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of a plaintiff's age discrimination 195 Wash.A......
-
Gelof v. Papineau, Civ. A. No. 83-210 CMW.
...duties at the OMBP with sufficient confidence to "justify some explanation on the part of the employer." Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div., 501 F.2d 84, 87 (5th Cir.1974). This is all the more true because defendant concedes that 80% of the duties of Clendaniel as Director of DDO were devoted t......
-
Thornbrough v. Columbus and Greenville R. Co., 84-4410
...(1984). 12 In certain instances, we have relaxed this test even further. For example, in Wilson v. Sealtest Foods Div. of Kraftco Corp., 501 F.2d 84 (5th Cir.1974), we reversed a directed verdict in favor of the employer, even though the plaintiff was replaced simply by a younger person, no......