Attorneys Frances Baillon and Joni Thome recently prevailed against Motions for Summary Judgment in Hennepin County District Court. The Orders Denying Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment for both cases are attached.
In Adamson v. Mattamy Homes, Plaintiff alleged she was discriminated against on the basis of her age and disability, and eventually terminated in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act. During her employment, Plaintiff alleged she witnessed the systematic cutting of her work hours and then termination after a new supervisor made ageist remarks including that she wanted “new blood” on her sales team. Plaintiff alleged that she was replaced by at least one younger worker. Plaintiff also alleged that her disability, cancer, was a motivating factor leading to her termination. Summary judgment regarding Plaintiff’s claim for age discrimination under the MHRA was denied. Adamson Summary Judgment Order
Likewise, in Blohm v. New England Financial/Mid American Financial Group, plaintiff alleged a hostile work environment that included disparate treatment of women and racial minorities. Plaintiff alleged a pattern of systematic destruction and dismantling of women working in certain sales positions lead to her termination. Plaintiff alleged that her manager had no interest in hiring women or racially diverse recruits because he believed “people like that don’t amount to anything,” and they were working in a “man’s industry in which women can’t keep up.” Plaintiff alleged that she was replaced with a male manager with significantly less investment and financial experience. The Court found that genuine issues of material fact exist and summary judgement was denied. Blohm Summary Judgment Order