2d Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Title VII Retaliation Claim; More Than One-Year Gap Too Attenuated to Show Causation

In Jordan v. United Health Group Inc., No. 18-2268, 2019 WL 4071943 (2d Cir. Aug. 29, 2019) (Summary Order), the Second Circuit, inter alia, affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s retaliation claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Here, plaintiff contends that she was terminated in retaliation for filing a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging race discrimination.

The court briefly summarized the law: “To sustain a prima facie case of retaliation under Title VII, a plaintiff must demonstrate that “(1) she was engaged in protected activity; (2) the employer was aware of that activity; (3) the employee suffered a materially adverse action; and (4) there was a causal connection between the protected activity and that adverse action.”

Plaintiff’s case, as do many retaliation cases, failed on the “causation” element:

Here, Jordan filed her EEOC charge on February 6, 2014, and she was terminated over a year later, on March 11, 2015. While a causal connection can be established by showing that the protected activity was closely followed in time by the adverse employment actions, the temporal nexus here—over one year—is too attenuated to establish such a connection. See Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. v. Breeden, 532 U.S. 268, 273–74 (2001) (noting that time periods greater than three months are insufficient to establish causal relationship); Hollander v. Am. Cyanamid Co., 895 F.2d 80, 85–86 (2d Cir. 1990) (gap of approximately three months between agency complaint and retaliatory action insufficient to prove causal nexus in age discrimination case).

Share This: