Ade v. Conklin Cars Salina

Summary

**Ade v. Conklin Cars Salina** – Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for employer on Title VII sex discrimination and Kansas retaliatory discharge claims. Plaintiff failed to show pretext for termination based on disruptive behavior and insubordination; the "same actor" inference applied where the same manager hired and fired her within six months. Her email complaining about a sales contest did not invoke rights under the Kansas Wage Payment Act or qualify as whistleblowing because it did not place the employer on notice of a statutory claim or involve a law pertaining to public health, safety, or general welfare.

Holdings

1. Ade failed to show pretext because the same-actor inference applied (same manager hired and fired her within six months) and she did not present evidence that similarly situated male employees were treated differently or that hearsay evidence of a meeting was admissible.
2. The email did not clearly assert rights under the KWPA; it merely expressed disagreement with the contest structure, not a legal claim.
3. Kansas law does not recognize whistleblower protections for KWPA violations under the Palmer framework because the KWPA is not a law pertaining to public health, safety, and general welfare.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment on Ade's Title VII sex discrimination claim by finding she failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to pretext.
2. Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment on Ade's retaliatory discharge claims under the Kansas Wage Payment Act and whistleblower protections.

Disposition

affirmed