{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-14","fingerprint":"ewai:us:88b5b2","proof":"sha256:15cd28f17fd9ad0aa4f9c0906ebf64e042dc531ba04822aa33a2a9f9803ce8c0","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176"],"kind":"front_matter"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"In the","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"United States Court of Appeals","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"For the Seventh Circuit","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"No. 24-2123","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"FRANKIE NELSON,","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"Plaintiff-Appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"v.","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"COUNTY OF COOK,","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"Defendant-Appellee.","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"Appeal from the United States District Court for the","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"No. 19-cv-06146 — Martha M. Pacold, Judge.","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"ARGUED FEBRUARY 26, 2025 — DECIDED AUGUST 25, 2025","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"Before ROVNER, SCUDDER and KOLAR, Circuit Judges.","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"ROVNER, Circuit Judge. Frankie Nelson worked at Provi-","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"dent Hospital, part of the Cook County Health and Hospital","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"System, from 1997 until she voluntarily retired in 2010. In Jan-","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"uary 2020, she filed this suit in the district court, alleging that","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"Cook County violated her rights under Title VII of the Civil","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., and the Equal","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"Pay Act of 1963, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d). The district court granted","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"summary judgment in favor of the defendant on both claims.","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"2 No. 24-2123","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"On appeal, Nelson challenges only summary judgment as to","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"the Title VII claim.","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"Nelson was hired in 1997 at Provident Hospital for the po-","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"sition of Environmental Services Supervisor, a position later","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"renamed Building Services Supervisor. That job was a union","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"position with a fixed hourly rate and eligibility for overtime","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"pay. In October 2004, Nelson received a raise and promotion","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"to the position of Building Custodian I, also a union position,","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"and remained in that position until her retirement in 2010. In","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"August 2002, Nelson was recognized to be the Acting Assis-","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"tant Director of Environmental Services, and beginning in","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"2003 she split the duties of that position with Henry White,","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"who was a Building Services Supervisor. They performed","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"those duties in addition to their regular job duties, with each","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"performing different functions of that position. Nelson served","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"as manager of operations and White managed the administra-","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"tive functions of that position. That continued until August","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"2005, when Nate Gordon became Director of Environmental","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"Services (“Director”) at Provident, at which time Gordon be-","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"came Nelson’s direct supervisor. Gordon succeeded Jerry","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"Brown, who was the Director of Environmental Services from","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"September 2000 until June 2005, and Nelson reported to him","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"during that time.","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"In her Title VII claim, Nelson alleges that she received dis-","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"criminatory treatment on the basis of sex, and specifically that","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"she was paid less than similarly situated males. Her claim of","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"pay disparity based on sex discrimination focuses solely on","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"the period of time from 2002 to 2005. The district court","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant on that","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"claim, and Nelson raises two challenges to the grant of sum-","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"No. 24-2123 3","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"mary judgment. First, she argues that the district court con-","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"sidered her claim only under the McDonnell Douglas burden-","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"shifting analytical framework and failed to also apply the to-","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"tality of the evidence approach set forth in Ortiz. See McDon-","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"nell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973) and Ortiz","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"v. Werner Enterprises, Inc., 834 F.3d 760, 766 (7th Cir. 2016).","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"And second, she contends that the court erred in concluding","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"that White was not a valid comparator.","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"Turning to the first challenge, the district court in its oral","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"decision explained that discrimination could be demon-","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"strated using the McDonnell Douglas framework or the totality","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"of the evidence standard set forth in Ortiz. The court explicitly","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"noted that under Ortiz, “the core question in any employment","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"discrimination case is simply whether the evidence would","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"permit a reasonable factfinder to conclude that the plaintiff’s","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"race, ethnicity, sex, religion, or other proscribed factor caused","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"the discharge or other adverse employment [action] at issue”","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"and that “[w]hen using this approach, courts ask only","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"whether the totality of the evidence shows discrimination, es-","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"chewing any framework or formula.” Dist. Ct. Transcript 5-","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"30-24 at 8–9 (quoting Johnson v. Soo Line R.R. Co., 2022 WL","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"540758, at *10 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 23, 2022)); see also Ortiz, 834 F.3d","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"at 766. And the court further recognized that the ultimate","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"question is always whether the evidence would permit a rea-","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"sonable factfinder to conclude that there would have been no","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"disparity in pay if the protected characteristic was different","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"and everything else remained the same. Id. at 10. Although","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"the court discussed the McDonnell Douglas factors at length in","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"analyzing Nelson’s claim, that was because Nelson sought to","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"rely upon the difference in pay between herself and other em-","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"ployees to provide an inference of discrimination sufficient to","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"survive summary judgment. That approach employs the","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"4 No. 24-2123","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"McDonnell Douglas framework to establish the inference of","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"discrimination, and the district court properly focused on that","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"test in assessing Nelson’s claim. In fact, the district court rec-","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"ognized that “‘in the wake of Ortiz, the McDonnell Douglas","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"framework is just a formal way of analyzing a discrimination","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"case when a certain kind of circumstantial evidence, evidence","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"that similarly situated employees not in the plaintiff’s pro-","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"tected class were treated better, would permit a jury to infer","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"discriminatory intent.’” Dist. Ct. Tr. at 9, App. at A-11, quot-","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"ing Lewis v. Wilkie, 909 F.3d 858, 867 (7th Cir. 2018). Because","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"Nelson sought to rely on similarly situated employees to es-","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"tablish the inference of discrimination, the court properly ad-","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"dressed whether that inference was supportable under the","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"McDonnell Douglas factors. There is no support in the record","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"for the argument that the court misunderstood the legal","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"standard or failed to properly consider it.","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"Nelson simply failed to produce sufficient facts support-","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"ing her claim of discrimination, and fails to point out suffi-","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"cient facts on appeal as well. She relied in the district court on","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"the argument that three other employees similarly-situated to","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"her received higher pay than her. Those employees were","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"White, who shared the Acting Assistant Director position","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"with her, and Gordon and Brown, who each held the position","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"of Director. The district court rejected that argument because","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"those employees were not similarly-situated to her, in that","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"they did not have the same job duties, education, or experi-","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"ence as she had, and that as to White, Nelson did not provide","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"evidence supporting the alleged wage disparity.","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"On appeal, Nelson focuses on White but fails to address","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"the basis upon which the district court rejected that argument.","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"The district court held that Nelson did not submit pay stubs","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"No. 24-2123 5","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"or records for White which would support her claim of a dis-","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"parity in compensation between White and Nelson or would","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"create a genuine issue of fact as to that issue. On that basis","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"alone, the comparison with White could not support a claim","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"of pay disparity. The court then proceeded to hold that even","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"if Nelson had submitted such evidence, and there was a dis-","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"crepancy in pay, White was still not a valid comparator. The","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"court expounded that they performed different functions in","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"the job that they shared with vastly different duties, and they","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"did not have comparable experience, education, or qualifica-","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"tions in that White possessed an associate’s, bachelor’s, and","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"master’s degree and Nelson lacked a college degree.","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"Nelson on appeal addresses only the second argument.","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"She does not even acknowledge the court’s holding that she","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"failed to provide evidence to support her claim of a pay dis-","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"parity with White, and accordingly does not point our court","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"to any evidence in the record that would refute that holding","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"by the district court. Because that holding is unchallenged in","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"this court and provides an independent basis to reject the","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"comparison with White, we need not address Nelson’s chal-","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"lenge to the alternative holding by the district court that","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"White and Nelson did not have similar jobs or qualifications.","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"The failure to provide evidence of White’s compensation","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"alone prevents a finding of disparate pay as to White. See","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"Trask v. Rodriguez, 854 F.3d 941, 944 (7th Cir. 2017) (holding","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"that the appellant failed to challenge the district court’s rea-","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"sons for granting summary judgment and therefore waived","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"any claim of error).","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"Nelson makes only cursory references to the other two al-","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"leged comparators in her brief, Gordon and Brown, who each","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"served as Directors. She complains briefly that she was more","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"6 No. 24-2123","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"capable than either of them of performing the job of Director,","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"but that she never received the promotion and pay of a Direc-","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"tor. Her complaint, however, does not allege discrimination","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"in promotions or hiring, but asserts only disparate pay for","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"comparable work, and she does not assert that she ever ap-","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"plied for the job of Director. In general, in order to establish","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"that a comparator is similarly situated, the plaintiff must pre-","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"sent evidence of “‘enough common factors … to allow for a","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"meaningful comparison in order to divine whether inten-","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"tional discrimination was at play.’” Coleman v. Donahue, 667","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"F.3d 835, 847 (7th Cir. 2012), (quoting Barricks v. Eli Lilly and","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"Co., 481 F.3d 556, 560 (7th Cir. 2007)). As to her claim of dis-","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"parate pay, the court properly held that Brown and Gordon","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"were not valid comparators. They each held a different posi-","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"tion than Nelson, reported to a different supervisor, and were","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"in fact her supervisors. As such, they were not engaged in ma-","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"terially-similar jobs such that a difference in pay could evi-","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"dence discrimination.","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"Accordingly, the court applied the correct law and","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"properly granted summary judgment in favor of the defend-","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"ants. The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.","paragraph_id":"para_176"}],"word_count":1562,"cites":["411 U.S. 792","834 F.3d 760","909 F.3d 858","854 F.3d 941","667\nF.3d 835","481 F.3d 556"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"7636c0d658716895ff6007987e34bcbadacff309bbbbdf98beb2c846b93f09b9","source_url":"https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/OpinionsWeb/processWebInputExternal.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2025/D08-25/C:24-2123:J:Rovner:aut:T:fnOp:N:3415039:S:0","fetched_at":"2026-10-02T12:55:15.155+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","verification":{"stored_sha256":"7636c0d658716895ff6007987e34bcbadacff309bbbbdf98beb2c846b93f09b9","recomputed_sha256":"7636c0d658716895ff6007987e34bcbadacff309bbbbdf98beb2c846b93f09b9","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-14T20:21:40.936Z"}},"hash":"sha256:15cd28f17fd9ad0aa4f9c0906ebf64e042dc531ba04822aa33a2a9f9803ce8c0","version":"legal-2026-10-14","expires":"2026-10-15T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-14+legal-2026-10-14+2026-10-14T19:52:40","content_hash":"sha256:15cd28f17fd9ad0aa4f9c0906ebf64e042dc531ba04822aa33a2a9f9803ce8c0","revalidate_after":"2026-10-14T21:21:41.133Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/ca7-24-2123-2025-08-25","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-ca0a9a69b3ace3ab37dc2f44732e5d20","response_hash":"sha256:15cd28f17fd9ad0aa4f9c0906ebf64e042dc531ba04822aa33a2a9f9803ce8c0"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:21:12.880Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Aca7-24-2123-2025-08-25&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":7936}}