Ronald Doyle v. City of Medford

MEMORANDUM

Ronald Doyle, Benedict Miller, and Charles Steinberg, retired employees of the City of Medford (the “City”), appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment on their claim that the City’s decision to exclude retirees from its group health insurance plan violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 (“ADEA”), and the court’s grant of summary judgment to the City. Appellants previously brought a claim of age discrimination under Oregon law. The state court found that the City’s policy of excluding retirees was not facially discriminatory (that is, it rejected appellants’ disparate treatment theory), but held, on a theory of disparate impact, that the City’s policy violated state law. The federal district court gave preclusive effect to the state court’s disparate treatment ruling, but declined to do so for the disparate impact theory. See Doyle v. City of Medford, 2011 WL 4894077 , at *2-*3 (D.Or.2011). It held that appellants failed to show pri-ma facie disparate impact and, alternatively, that thé City established a statutory affirmative defense because its decision to exclude retirees was reasonably based on…