The definitions in our glossary are primarily sourced from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary and Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. We have made slight modifications where needed for brevity and to better tailor the definitions to the specific needs of users of this website. For more detailed explanations of the terms, users are encouraged to review the definitions on these websites or conduct their own independent research.
CASE NAME
Vavra v. Honeywell
Overview
Appellant, a former employee of Defendant, alleged that he was fired for voicing objections to Defendant's implicit bias training initiative.
Details
The district court granted summary judgment to Defendant. The court held that there was no evidence that the training was racially discriminatory, and further held that Plaintiff's refusal to take the training was not protected activity under Title VII.
In addition, the court held that although Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by writing complaint emails, Plaintiff pointed to no evidence that his employment was terminated for engaging in such protected activity.
Plaintiff appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeals court dismissed the appeal in July 2024, finding that Appellant's retaliation claim was "meritless." The court held that Appellant's opposition to the DEI training was not protected activity, and that even if some of his complaints were protected activity, he did not demonstrate a causal connection between the complaints and his termination.
Court
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals
Status
Filed September 20, 2023 | Decided
Litigation History