Esther PANLILIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellee

625 F.2d 1182, 23 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1575, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 13988, 24 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 31,239
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 17, 1980
Docket80-1117
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 625 F.2d 1182 (Esther PANLILIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Esther PANLILIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellee, 625 F.2d 1182, 23 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1575, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 13988, 24 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 31,239 (5th Cir. 1980).

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the Dallas Independent School District (DISD) in a Title YII case. At the trial the Appellant unsuccessfully asserted discrimination in hiring due to her Filipino origin. The District Court found that Pan-lilio’s national origin was not the reason she was not hired as a teacher by the DISD. Rather, it was “the negative recommendations given to her by two Catholic Sisters [principals of the two parochial schools where she previously had taught], representing separately stated views based on virtually all of Ms. Panlilio’s teaching experience in the Dallas community.”

In so holding, the District Court credited the testimony of the Assistant Director of Personnel for the DISD on this question. We do not find the District Court’s conclusion that national origin was not the reason that Panlilio was denied employment to be clearly erroneous. Nor do we find clearly erroneous the District Court’s conclusion that these negative recommendations were the true reason Panlilio was not hired. There was substantial evidence in the record to support both of these conclusions. See Burdine v. Texas Department of Community Affairs, 608 F.2d 563, 566 (5th Cir. 1979).

In the alternative, Panlilio asserts employment discrimination in that she was not even considered for employment before she received her Texas Teacher’s Certificate. The record clearly shows that a certificate was one of the minimum requirements for employment with the DISD. Although the DISD could acquire emergency certificates for noncertified teachers in order to hire them, and did so in some instances, this only could be done when the noncertified teacher had some special, needed qualification and there was not a certified teacher with the same qualification available. Panlilio had no such qualifications.

Likewise, the DISD may, and sometimes does, hire college seniors before they graduate and become certified, to begin work the next fall. But letters from their colleges guaranteeing that they will become certified is required. Panlilio did not fall within this category either.

Thus on the acceptable findings of the District Court Panlilio was not discriminated against because the DISD did not obtain an emergency certificate for her or hire her before she was certified. Nor did the DISD discriminate against her at any time because she was Filipino.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
625 F.2d 1182, 23 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1575, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 13988, 24 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 31,239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/esther-panlilio-plaintiff-appellant-v-dallas-independent-school-ca5-1980.