DAWN HAYES v. CLARIANT PLASTICS & COATINGS USA, INC. - Articles

All Content

DAWN HAYES v. CLARIANT PLASTICS & COATINGS USA, INC.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jul 18, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Christopher K. Cooke, SECREST WARDLE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Matthew T. Nicols, SECREST WARDLE, Troy, Michigan, for Appellant. Joshua P. Lushnat, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, PLLC, Birmingham, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 2: ON BRIEF: Christopher K. Cooke, SECREST WARDLE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Matthew T. Nicols, SECREST WARDLE, Troy, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Joshua P. Lushnat, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, PLLC, Birmingham, Michigan, for Appellee.

Judge(s): GIBBONS, LARSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids

JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. After 25 years of employment, Clariant Plastics & Coatings USA, Inc. fired Dawn Hayes from her job as a warehouse logistics clerk. The company claims that she was laid off as part of a workforce reduction program; Hayes argues that she was terminated because of her gender and age. Hayes sued in federal court, asserting claims for discrimination, unequal pay, and hostile work environment. The district court granted summary judgment for Clariant on all claims. While we agree that Clariant is entitled to summary judgment on the age discrimination and hostile work environment claims, Hayes has presented a genuine issue of material fact on her gender discrimination and unequal pay claims. Thus, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings consistent with our opinion.

Attachments: