Phillip
Phillip v. Mayo Clinic Arizona
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Carl Phillip resigned from his position as a senior systems analyst at the Mayo Clinic of Arizona (Mayo), after he was informed that he would have to participate in a corrective action plan to improve his deficient job performance, and that his internal complaint of hostile and unfair working conditions could not be substantiated. Phillip then sued Mayo in the district court, claiming to have been wrongfully terminated because of race discrimination in violation of Title VII. The district court interpreted Phillip’s single-count Amended Complaint as raising theories of disparate treatment, constructive discharge, and hostile work environment. Nevertheless, the court entered summary judgment in favor of Mayo because Phillip had failed to raise a triable issue on any of those theories. Phillip filed a motion for reconsideration, which the district court denied, and then he filed a notice of appeal from the district court’s order “denying his Motion for Reconsideration entered on April 2, 2001, *289 and affirming its order granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment entered February 14, 2001.”