Geleta was the Project Director coordinator for a city-wide mental health initiative for children and their families. In that role, he supervised 20 employees, and oversaw the planning, implementation and evaluation of his department’s operations. After a meeting he attended in which a dispute arose between two co-workers, Geleta supported the claim of the co-worker who claimed she had been discriminated against. As a witness, he completed a report, and submitted it to the Equal Employment Opportunity Office (EEOO). Shortly afterward, he was transferred to a different department, where he worked on a backlog of applications, did no supervisory work, and worked as the assistant of another coworker. He filed suit alleging that he had been retaliated against, and that his lateral transfer constituted a materially adverse employment action against him. The District court entered summary judgment for the his employer, the Department of Health, and Geleta appealed. 

1. What were the legal issues in this case? What did the appeals court decide?

2. What type of protected activity did the plaintiff engage in? Why was his lateral transfer a materially adverse action? What is the evidence that this transfer was causally linked to the plaintiff’s protected activity?

3. What is the evidence of pretext in this case?

4. Do you think that this employee was retaliated against? Why or why not?

5. If retaliation did occur, why do you suppose that the relevant decision maker(s) acted in that way?