Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Weiss v. Morgan Stanley Investment Management
Citation: 345 F. App'x 713Docket: No. 08-2266-cv
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; September 16, 2009; Federal Appellate Court
Alice Weiss appeals a March 27, 2008 summary judgment that dismissed her claims against Morgan Stanley Investment Management for discrimination based on gender, age, national origin, and religion, as well as retaliation following her discrimination complaint prior to her termination. Weiss worked at the firm since its predecessor, Dean Witter, beginning as a statistician and advancing to vice president. She managed the Value Added Market Series Mutual Fund, which transitioned to a pure index fund, prompting a budget review that led to a reduction in force (RIF). Morgan Stanley decided to eliminate one of the two index portfolio manager positions, choosing to retain a younger male employee, Kevin Jung, citing legitimate business reasons. Prior to her termination on September 30, 2003, Weiss expressed concerns about discrimination to her supervisor, who reported her claims to human resources. Morgan Stanley contends that the decision to terminate Weiss was documented before her complaint was made. The court reviews summary judgments de novo and must favor the nonmovant when resolving ambiguities. For Weiss to establish a prima facie case of retaliation, she must demonstrate that she engaged in protected activity, the employer was aware of it, an adverse action was taken, and a causal connection exists between the two. If Weiss meets this burden, Morgan Stanley must show a non-discriminatory reason for her termination, after which Weiss can challenge the legitimacy of that reason. The district court determined that Weiss established the elements of her prima facie case, but Morgan Stanley provided a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for her termination: Weiss was included in a reduction in force (RIF) as early as June or July 2003, prior to her discrimination complaint, negating any causal link between the complaint and her termination. On appeal, Weiss argued that Morgan Stanley's evidence for summary judgment was not properly authenticated, rendering it inadmissible. However, this objection was not raised in the district court, and as conceded by Weiss’ counsel, it is critical since parties are not required to authenticate documents if their authenticity was not challenged below. The court referenced H. Sand. Co., Inc. v. Airtemp Corp. to support this point. Weiss' failure to contest the authentication issue at the district level undermined her claims on appeal. The court found Weiss' other arguments unmeritorious and affirmed the district court's judgment and order.