On Monday, March 10, Renne Public Law Group (RPLG) secured a victory on behalf of the City of Stockton when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a Ninth Circuit panel opinion in Hittle v. City of Stockton, which held that the City’s former Fire Chief could not proceed on his Title VII religious discrimination case against the City, ending a litigation dispute spanning two decades.

Ron Hittle served as the City of Stockton Fire Chief beginning in 2008, in the years leading up to the City’s historic bankruptcy. The City terminated his employment in 2011 “because of incompatibility of management styles, change in administration, and his apparent inability and/or unwillingness to implement City goals and policies.” The City’s Notice of Proposed Termination identified a number of the City’s specific concerns regarding Hittle’s performance which were addressed in an extensive investigation report written by an independent attorney investigator. These concerns included Hittle failing to disclose his financial interest in a vacation home he co-owned with two subordinates and then providing two of these subordinates favorable treatment when they engaged in unlawful conduct, such as timecard fraud and intentional leaking of patient medical information to the local newspaper. City management also expressed concern about Hittle’s repeated refusal and reluctance to comply with budget directives while the City was in the throes of its extreme financial crisis.

Prior to his termination, Hittle’s supervisor expressed her concerns about Hittle’s “clear lack of leadership and management skills” and directed him to attend leadership training specifically designed for fire department or public agency managers. Instead, Hittle and three of his managers, including a co-owner of his vacation home and a friend from Hittle’s church, used a City vehicle and City time to attend the Global Leadership Summit, a two-day religious conference with the stated purpose of “transform[ing] Christian leaders for the sake of the local church.” When later asked about his attendance at the event, Hittle denied that he was attending for religious purposes and insisted that he was attending the Summit at his supervisor’s direction. But he also conceded that the Summit did not include any training components specific to fire department or city management, as directed by his supervisor.

The City terminated Hittle’s at-will employment in 2011, citing several examples of his conduct the City found concerning, including his unapproved on-duty attendance at a religious conference not for the City’s benefit. Hittle then sued the City under Title VII, a federal anti-discrimination law, and under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, the state law analog of Title VII. Hittle argued that the City’s termination of his employment was discriminatory, based on his religion, relying principally on the termination notice’s reference to his attendance at the Global Leadership Summit — an event that Hittle conceded was not part of his religious practice.

RPLG represented the City in the district court and, after extensive discovery, obtained summary judgment against Hittle. Hittle appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which upheld the district court decision and the underlying termination over multiple dissenting opinions from the denial of en banc. In reaching their conclusions, both courts relied on McDonnell Douglas v. Green, a 50-year-old Supreme Court case establishing a three-step burden shifting framework plaintiffs can use to demonstrate discrimination under Title VII and other anti-discrimination statutes.

Hittle petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to grant review, arguing that the Ninth Circuit’s application of McDonnell Douglas test conflicted with Title VII’s statutory language and deepened a split among the appellate circuits, and urged the Supreme Court to abandon the decades-old precedent. The Supreme Court ultimately declined to grant review. Justice Thomas authored a dissent, which Justice Gorsuch joined.

“This is a great victory for the City of Stockton, which terminated Hittle’s employment for legitimate business reasons,” stated RPLG Senior Counsel Spencer Wilson. “ The decision also clarifies the Title VII and FEHA summary judgment standard for other public employers and makes clear that weak circumstantial evidence of discrimination will not alone defeat summary judgment where there is a robust record demonstrating legitimate non-discriminatory bases for an employment action.”

RPLG Of Counsel Geoff Spellberg and Senior Counsel Spencer Wilson worked on the case at the trial level, securing the favorable summary judgment ruling. RPLG Partner and Head of Appellate Practice Ryan McGinley-Stempel, Founding Partner Art Hartinger, and Wilson represented the City before the Ninth Circuit, with Wilson presenting oral argument. Following the Ninth Circuit’s opinion, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP joined forces with RPLG in drafting the brief in opposition to certiorari.

A copy of the Ninth Circuit’s opinion can be found here. A copy of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision can be found here.