Chaney v. Plainfield Healthcare Center

612 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2010)

From our private database of 47,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Chaney v. Plainfield Healthcare Center

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
612 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2010)

Facts

Brenda Chaney (plaintiff) worked as a certified nursing assistant (CNA) at Plainfield Healthcare Center (Plainfield) (defendant). Plainfield resident Marjorie Latshaw informed Plainfield that she did not want care from Black CNAs. Plainfield had a policy of complying with residents’ racial preferences. Consequently, on the daily assignment sheets provided to CNAs, Plainfield noted Latshaw’s preference. Afraid of being fired, Chaney, who was Black, honored Latshaw’s request. However, the race-based limitations on Chaney’s work caused her emotional upset. That upset was heightened by comments from White coworkers taunting Chaney about her race’s impact on her ability to provide care. Although Plainfield took measures to discourage the worst comments, coworkers continued to regularly reference Chaney’s inability to care for certain residents. Sometime later, Plainfield fired Chaney. Chaney then sued Plainfield, alleging that Plainfield violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by (1) complying with residents’ racial preferences and creating a hostile work environment and (2) firing Chaney because of her race. Regarding the hostile-work-environment claim, Plainfield argued that honoring residents’ racial preferences was required to comply with federal and state laws regarding the provision of medical care. The district court agreed, granting summary judgment in Plainfield’s favor on the hostile-work-environment claim. Chaney appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Williams, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 899,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,000 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership