Boyd v. Legacy Health

Under Henderson v. Jantzen Inc., 79 Or App 654 (1986), the mere assertion of a non-discriminatory reason for termination does not destroy a prima facie case for retaliation and wrongful discharge.

Boyd appealed from a grant of summary judgment in favor of Legacy Health, dismissing his retaliation and wrongful discharge claims. Boyd assigned error to the trial court’s determination that there were no genuine issues of material fact. On appeal, Boyd argued the trial court erroneously understood his attorney’s arguments against summary judgment as conceding that he was fired for Legacy Health’s stated reason. In response, Legacy Health argued the trial court was “right for the wrong reasons,” citing its alternative arguments presented to the trial court that Boyd was not engaged in a statutorily protected activity or an activity fulfilling an important public duty and that the decisionmaker in Boyd’s termination lacked a retaliatory motivation. Under Henderson v. Jantzen Inc., 79 Or App 654 (1986), the mere assertion of a non-discriminatory reason for termination does not destroy a prima facie case for retaliation and wrongful discharge. The Court found that the trial court misunderstood Boyd’s attorney’s statements as a concession that Boyd was fired for Legacy Health’s proffered reason and that the trial court erroneously relied on that concession in granting summary judgment. The Court reasoned that when viewed in context with Boyd’s written response to Legacy Health’s summary judgment motion, the purported concession could be, at most, understood as a concession of what Legacy Health’s proffered reason for firing Boyd was, and not that it was the actual reason. The Court further reasoned that just because Legacy Health presented a lawful reason for termination does not mean it acted on that basis, and whether it did is a question of fact. Finally, the Court rejected Legacy Health’s alternative arguments because the summary judgment record was sufficient to show Boyd’s activity was statutorily protected and fulfilled an important public purpose and that there was a retaliatory motive behind his termination. Reversed and Remanded.