It can happen, and it can sink a later discrimination claim. In this case, the Appeals Court upheld summary judgment for an employer on a disability discrimination claim, holding that the employee’s refusal to attend meetings and answer calls was a legitimate reason to fire her and that she had no evidence the reason was a cover story. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
The employee was a department head in the Boston office of a pharmaceutical company, reporting to a supervisor based overseas. A few months after she started, she told the supervisor about a medical condition and later described it as a disability. The supervisor told her she could not use it as an excuse not to deliver, criticized her work, moved up a project deadline, and turned down a conference trip. She complained to human resources, which met with her and the supervisor and gave both feedback. Then she emailed that she would no longer attend one-on-one meetings with the supervisor. The next day she skipped a meeting with HR and the supervisor, skipped a meeting she herself had asked for with the chief operating officer, and did not answer HR’s calls or texts. HR and the chief operating officer then fired her, saying they took her silence to mean she was leaving the job.
What the court decided
The Appeals Court affirmed in Locklear v. argenx US, Inc., No. 24-P-184 (Mass. App. Ct. February 20, 2025) (Rule 23.0 decision).
G.L. c. 151B, § 4(16), bars an employer from firing a qualified person because of a disability. Without direct proof, an employee uses a three-step test. She shows a basic case of discrimination, the employer gives a legitimate reason, and she then offers evidence that the reason is a pretext. Sullivan v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 444 Mass. 34 (2005). Massachusetts is a pretext only state. That means she does not have to prove the real reason was discrimination, only that a jury could find the stated reason was not the real one. Verdrager v. Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky & Popeo, P.C., 474 Mass. 382 (2016); Bulwer v. Mount Auburn Hosp., 473 Mass. 672 (2016).
The court assumed she had a basic case. It found the employer’s reason, her abandonment of her duties, was legitimate. Then it rejected each of her pretext arguments.
First, the firing was not rushed. Over two days, HR and the chief operating officer kept trying to set up meetings and resolve the conflict. Only after she ignored those efforts did they act. The court compared Tate v. Department of Mental Health, 419 Mass. 356 (1995), which upheld summary judgment where an employee was fired for insubordination.
Second, HR’s statement that it would have granted time off if she had asked was not inconsistent with the firing. She never asked for time off.
Third, the supervisor’s comments did not help her, because there was no evidence he took part in the decision. She argued a cat’s paw theory, under which a biased supervisor’s influence on the decision makers can be enough. See Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 562 U.S. 411 (2011). But nothing in the record showed he influenced HR or the chief operating officer, and guesswork does not defeat summary judgment.
What this means for you
Summary judgment is disfavored in discrimination cases because intent is a fact question. Still, this case shows how an employee can lose before trial. A strong complaint about a supervisor can be undercut by how you respond to the conflict. Refusing meetings and going silent gave the employer a clean, documented reason to act.
The case also shows that biased comments matter most when they come from the people who make or shape the decision. If your supervisor’s remarks are the core of your claim, you need evidence linking that supervisor to the firing.
If a supervisor’s treatment is affecting you, there are better paths than walking away from your duties. You can make a written complaint, ask for a different reporting line, or ask for a reasonable accommodation or leave in writing.
What to do now
- Put disability-related requests in writing, and say clearly what you need, such as time off or a schedule change.
- Keep attending required meetings, even hard ones, and bring a written summary of your concerns.
- Answer your employer’s messages, even briefly, so silence is not read as quitting.
- Write down every comment about your disability, with the date, the speaker and any witnesses.
- Talk to a lawyer before you refuse an instruction or decide to leave.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. Deadlines for discrimination and employment claims can be short.
