Randy Evans appeals the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Myers Autoworld, Inc. (“Myers”). Evans contends that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of Myers with regard to his claim for retaliatory discharge. Specifically, Evans asserts that summary judgment was improper because the evidence reveals a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Myers’s stated reason for his termination was pretextual. Evans also claims that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Myers because of the close temporal connection between the date he filed his workers’ compensation claim and the date he was terminated.
Conclusion (slip op. at 9): The trial court did not err in granting Myers’s motion for summary judgment.
Key Analysis (slip op. at 8-9): Because Myers was able to present a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for Evans’s termination and because Evans was unable to show that this reason was pretextual, the trial court properly granted Myers’s motion for summary judgment in this regard . . . Apart from Evans’s unsubstantiated allegations, the undisputed evidence establishes that Evans was terminated approximately five months after he filed his workers’ compensation claim because of his physical inability to perform the tasks required by his position. Because timing evidence is rarely sufficient in and of itself to create a jury issue on causation and in light of Evans’s failure to point to any conflicting evidence, we conclude that Evans has failed to present an issue of fact regarding causation.