Hamilton, an African American male, was denied promotion 3 times, and on the third denial, sued, alleging race and sex discrimination, and retaliation. A white female was hired for the position, although Hamilton had clearly superior qualifications. The reason given by the agency (the IRS) was that Hamilton had done poorly on the interview, while Burrell (the white female) had done very well. But there was no documentation noting these alleged facts, and one page of one panelist’s notes was missing. 

1. What was the legal issue in this case? What did the appeals court decide?

2. What were the relative qualifications of the plaintiff and the successful candidate? Although there was other relevant evidence in this case, ws the gap in qualifications by itself large enough in your view to conclude that the employer’s claim of hiring the most qualified candidate was pretext? Why or why not?

3. Why does the court find that a reasonable jury might disbelieve the employer’s claim that it chose the successful candidate based on her superior interview performance?

4. What are the practical implications of this decision? What should this employer have done differently in terms of its interviewing and selection process?