Richard R. Goecke v. 3M Company

Goecke · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 14, 2026 · No. 25-1468

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for 3M in Richard Goecke’s Title VII religious-discrimination action arising from 3M’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate. The court held that Goecke did not suffer an adverse employment action because he voluntarily retired before the vaccination deadline and before 3M decided his religious-exemption request. The court also rejected his constructive-discharge argument and concluded that the alleged factual disputes did not preclude summary judgment.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Gruender, Circuit Judge; ColloTon, Chief Judge; Kobes, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decision date
May 14, 2026
Docket number
25-1468
Procedural posture
Appeal from the District of Minnesota's grant of summary judgment to 3M on Goecke's Title VII religious-discrimination claim.
Standard of review
De novo review of summary judgment, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and drawing all reasonable inferences in that party's favor.
Precedential value
Published precedential opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Parties
Richard R. Goecke v. 3M Company
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

religious discriminationtitle viiconstructive dischargeemployment discriminationappellate procedure

Practice areas

employment lawcivil rightsappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Goecke established a prima facie case of religious discrimination under Title VII by showing that he suffered an adverse employment action.
  2. Whether Goecke was constructively discharged when he retired before the vaccination deadline and before 3M decided his religious-exemption request.
  3. Whether alleged factual disputes concerning the religious nature of Goecke's beliefs, 3M's accommodation process, good faith, discriminatory impact, and alternatives to the mandate precluded summary judgment.

Holdings

  1. Goecke failed to establish a prima facie case because the undisputed record showed that he did not suffer an adverse employment action.
  2. Goecke was not constructively discharged because he quit without giving 3M a reasonable opportunity to resolve his concerns about the vaccine mandate.
  3. The alleged factual disputes did not preclude summary judgment because none could affect the outcome where 3M took no adverse action and Goecke was not constructively discharged.

Key quotations

An employee who quits without giving his employer a reasonable chance to work out a problem has not been constructively discharged. (at 4)
Direct evidence of discrimination requires a specific link between the alleged discriminatory animus and the challenged decision, sufficient to support a finding by a reasonable fact finder that an illegitimate criterion actually motivated the employer’s decision. (at 3)
Goecke did not give 3M a reasonable chance to resolve his concerns about the vaccine requirement. (at 4)

Factual background

3M announced a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for U.S. employees who lacked a valid medical or religious exemption, with vaccination initially required by December 8, 2021 and later extended to January 4, 2022. Goecke, a practicing Christian opposed to vaccination on religious grounds, requested a religious exemption but soon elected to begin receiving pension benefits, instructed his manager to announce his retirement, turned in his computer, cleaned out his workspace, and held his exit interview. He formally left 3M before the vaccination deadline and before 3M ruled on his exemption request; 3M later denied the request and then rescinded the mandate after the federal-contractor vaccination requirements were halted.

Procedural history

Goecke sued 3M alleging disability and religious discrimination under Minnesota law and Title VII after resigning in the context of 3M's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The district court dismissed the disability-discrimination claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and granted 3M summary judgment on the religious-discrimination claims. Goecke appealed the summary judgment ruling on his Title VII claim; the Eighth Circuit affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…