BLACK, Circuit Judge, specially concurring:
Although I agree with the majority opinion, I would confine
the discussion to those legal concepts directly implicated by the
instant facts. The legal principles that control this dispute are
familiar and do not require extended explication. Under the
McDonnell Douglas framework, a presumption of discrimination arises
if a Title VII plaintiff succeeds in establishing a prima facie
case. Texas Dep't of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248,
254, 101 S. Ct. 1089, 1094 (1981). The defendant may rebut the
presumption by articulating a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason
for the challenged employment decision. Id. at 254-55, 101 S. Ct.
at 1094-95. At that point, the presumption disappears from the
case, leaving the plaintiff with the ultimate burden of convincing
the factfinder that a discriminatory reason more likely than not
motivated the employment action. Id. at 256, 101 S. Ct. at 1095.
The plaintiff may shoulder this burden either directly by
persuading the factfinder that a discriminatory reason motivated
the employer or indirectly by showing that the employer's proffered
explanation is unworthy of credence. Id.
The majority opinion properly applied these fundamental
principles when it determined that Combs failed to adduce
sufficient evidence to withstand Meadowcraft's motions for judgment
as a matter of law. The evidence offered by Combs would not permit
a reasonable trier of fact to find either that a discriminatory
reason motivated Meadowcraft or that the legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reasons proffered were not worthy of belief.
Undisputed evidence established that Walker had superior managerial
experience, and Combs offered no evidence tending to undermine the
veracity of Meadowcraft's claimed reliance on this factor.
2