Sixth Circuit: Retaliation Claim Fails if Decision-Maker is Unaware of Complaints
1 min read
Mar 25, 2014
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has held that a terminated Hispanic employee working as the director of global finance for an auto parts company in Michigan could not sustain a retaliation claim because he was unable to show that the managers who fired him were aware of his complaints to HR about disparaging remarks.
The employee claimed that his employer violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, by terminating him after he complained to human resources for being subjected to racially and ethnically derogatory comments made in his presence by a co-executive employee. The Sixth Circuit granted the employer's motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the employee could not state a prima facie retaliation claim. The appellate court specifically found that he could not establish that the management-level employees who recommended his termination had knowledge of the employee's protected activity (i.e., complaining about racially disparaging remarks concerning his Hispanic heritage). The Court also rejected the employee's claim that the complaint to human resources was imputed to the decision makers and therefore the retaliatory motive could be established.
When investigating complaints of harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation, it is a good idea to share the nature, extent, and results of the investigation with others on a need-to-know basis, as knowledge may serve to either help or hurt an employer's defense of such claims.
Featured Insights

In The News
Jul 16, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Anticipates Epic Battle Between “Titans of the Antitrust Bar”

Press Release
Jul 15, 2026
Two Hinshaw Partners Recognized in Minnesota Monthly's 2026 Top Lawyers in Minnesota

Event
July 13-15, 2026
Hinshaw Proudly Sponsors 2026 Lavender Law Conference and Career Fair

Webinar
Jul 14, 2026
Scott Seaman Presents on Horizontal vs. Vertical Exhaustion of Insurance

Healthcare Alert
Jul 8, 2026
A New Era of Compliance Standards for California DSOs and MSOs After the Aspen Dental Settlement

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 7, 2026
What Insurers Need to Know About California’s FAIR Plan Assessment Recoupment Guidance

In The News
Jul 6, 2026
Francesco Palanda’s Practical Guide for Mitigating AI-Related Business Interruption Risk

Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter
Jun 29, 2026
Beyond Malpractice: The Rising Threat of Privacy and Statutory Claims Against Lawyers



