Fields v. Clark University

Summary

The First Circuit reviewed cross-appeals arising from a Title VII sex-discrimination challenge to Clark University's denial of Rona Fields's tenure. The court held that, where a plaintiff proves by direct evidence that unlawful discrimination was a motivating factor, the employer bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have made the same decision absent discrimination. The court vacated the district court's order and remanded for a new trial on all issues.

Holdings

1. When a Title VII plaintiff proves by direct evidence that unlawful discrimination was a motivating factor in an employment decision, the employer bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have made the same decision absent the discrimination.
2. Proof that discrimination was a motivating factor does not alone entitle the plaintiff to reinstatement or back pay; the court must determine whether the employer proves that the same employment decision would have occurred absent discrimination.
3. The district court erred by placing on Fields the burden of proving that she was entitled to tenure after finding that sex discrimination directly motivated the tenure decision, and it also erred by ordering reinstatement and back pay without requiring Clark University to prove the same-decision defense.

Questions Presented

1. When a Title VII plaintiff proves by direct evidence that unlawful sex discrimination was a motivating factor in an employment decision, which party bears the burden of proving that the same decision would have been made absent discrimination?
2. Did the district court err by ordering reinstatement and back pay without determining whether Clark University had proved that Fields would have been denied tenure even absent discrimination?
3. Should the district court's order be vacated and the case remanded for a new trial?

Disposition

vacated