5th Circuit rules HR’s discrimination investigation is admissible evidence

Is an HR investigation into discrimination admissible evidence? A recent case from the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal appeals court covering Texas) declares the answer is “yes.” But as the expression goes, the devil is in the details. Read on.

Claim of no service because of race

Sharnez Hager and her family (all of them African Americans) went to a Chili’s restaurant operated by Brinker Texas, Incorporated, and were allegedly denied service because of their race. She filed a lawsuit under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

But before she filed suit, she complained to Brinker about the no-service incident. As a result, a mere four days after the incident, Brinker sent HR investigator Tristan Venable to look into it. According to his report, the restaurant hostess didn’t seat Hager and her party because of a staff shortage combined with a customer rush, not because of race. He summarized his conclusions in an email to the company shortly after wrapping up his investigation.

The trial court dismissed the lawsuit because Hager couldn’t show Venable’s report was arguably false. The question on appeal was whether the report was admissible under the rules of evidence. By a 2-to-1 vote, the appeals court said, “Come on in!”

Why admissible?