PATTERSON v. AVERY DENNISON CORP. Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A plaintiff’s gender discrimination claim failed because her proposed male comparators were not “similarly situated.” The court also upheld the denial of a motion to compel a high-ranking executive’s deposition, citing the availability of less burdensome discovery methods.
Legal Significance: Establishes that a subordinate is generally not “similarly situated” to a supervisor for Title VII comparison purposes. Also affirms a court’s discretion to deny depositions of high-ranking executives when less burdensome discovery methods, like interrogatories, are available but unused.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Kim Patterson sued her former employer, Avery Dennison, for gender discrimination under Title VII after her termination. Her role on a temporary logistics task force was eliminated upon the project’s completion. Patterson recommended creating a new permanent logistics manager position, for which she was considered but not selected, as the company stated the role required more logistics experience. Patterson was subsequently terminated. To establish a prima facie case, Patterson alleged she was treated less favorably than two male employees, Steve Meyer and Dan Hillegonds. Meyer was Patterson’s supervisor on the task force, while Hillegonds was a manager in a different corporate division. During discovery, Patterson sought to compel the deposition of Thomas Miller, a high-ranking corporate vice president based 1,000 miles away, who had sent an email asking human resources to “take a second look” at Patterson’s situation. The district court denied the motion to compel and granted summary judgment for Avery, finding Patterson failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the plaintiff establish a prima facie case of gender discrimination by showing she was treated less favorably than similarly situated male employees, and did the trial court abuse its discretion by denying her motion to compel the deposition of a high-ranking executive?
No. The court affirmed summary judgment for the employer, holding that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit ani
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Did the plaintiff establish a prima facie case of gender discrimination by showing she was treated less favorably than similarly situated male employees, and did the trial court abuse its discretion by denying her motion to compel the deposition of a high-ranking executive?
Conclusion
This case reinforces the stringent "similarly situated" standard in employment discrimination cases, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut al
Legal Rule
To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the McDonnell Douglas Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint
Legal Analysis
The Seventh Circuit analyzed Patterson's Title VII claim under the McDonnell Douglas Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cil
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A plaintiff fails to establish a prima facie case of discrimination