## Facts

- Darren Stanley, a Black man, began working for Kansas City Southern Railway Company (KCS) in 1998 and later received two raises in rank while employed.
- KCS maintained written policies governing workplace computer use and prohibiting harassment, including sexual harassment.
- Stanley signed a written authorization acknowledging receipt of KCS’s policies and also showed he understood the rules by warning coworkers not to send personal messages through work email.
- In 1998, KCS warned Stanley about the computer-use policy after he sent a sexually explicit email.
- In 2002, KCS conducted a company-wide email audit and found that Stanley had sent more than 46 inappropriate emails using his work computer.
- Many emails were sexually explicit messages to a subordinate female employee, and some included graphic sexual content (including an explicit cartoon image).
- KCS terminated Stanley based on the email audit results and the policy violations.
- Stanley sued KCS under Title VII, claiming he was terminated because of his race. He conceded the emails were lewd and violated KCS’s computer-use and anti-harassment policies but argued other KCS employees were treated better.

## Issues

1. Whether Stanley produced sufficient evidence that KCS terminated him because of race, including evidence that similarly situated non-Black employees who engaged in comparable misconduct were treated more favorably.
2. Whether KCS articulated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the termination and, if so, whether Stanley raised a genuine dispute that the stated reason was a cover for race discrimination.

## Decision

- The court granted KCS’s motion for summary judgment on Stanley’s Title VII race-discrimination claim.
- The court found KCS presented a legitimate, non-discriminatory basis for termination: Stanley’s repeated and serious violations of KCS’s computer-use and anti-harassment rules, confirmed by the audit and not disputed as to policy violation.
- The court determined Stanley failed to create a triable fact dispute that KCS’s reason was false or that race was the real reason for the discharge.
- The court rejected Stanley’s attempt to rely on other employees as comparisons where the record did not show those employees were similarly situated in misconduct and relevant circumstances.
- Because Stanley could not show pretext, KCS was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

## Legal Principles

- Summary judgment is appropriate when the nonmoving party fails to present evidence that would allow a reasonable jury to find in its favor on an essential element of the claim.
- Under Title VII’s burden-shifting method for circumstantial proof, the plaintiff must first show a prima facie case; the employer must then state a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason; the plaintiff must then show the stated reason is a pretext for discrimination.
- An employer’s discharge decision based on documented violations of workplace conduct rules can be a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for termination.
- To show pretext through comparative treatment, a plaintiff must identify comparators who are truly similarly situated in relevant respects (including the nature and seriousness of the misconduct and the context of the discipline).
- A plaintiff’s admission that the conduct occurred and violated written workplace rules makes it harder to show the employer’s stated reason was false; the remaining question is whether the employer acted because of race, which must be supported by record evidence rather than speculation.

## Conclusion

The court entered summary judgment for Kansas City Southern Railway because the record showed Stanley was fired for sending numerous sexually explicit and otherwise improper emails in violation of clear company policies, and Stanley failed to present evidence that similarly situated non-Black employees were treated better or that KCS’s stated reason was a cover for race discrimination.


Cargo v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co., 2012 WL 4596757 (2012)