Nicholas Sellman v. Aviation Training Consulting, LLC

In Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 562 U.S. 411 (2011), this Court held that an employer is liable under a “cat’s paw” theory when a supervisor acts with discriminatory animus, intends that act to cause an adverse employment action, and that act is a proximate cause of the ultimate decision. The Court rejected categorical defenses based on layered decisionmaking or independent review, explaining that causation is severed only when the adverse action rests on reasons unrelated to the supervisor’s original biased act. The courts of appeals are now divided over how to apply Staub. Most circuits treat “cat’s paw” liability as a proximate-cause inquiry, holding that intervening review or multiple decisionmakers do not automatically defeat liability. But the Fourth, Eleventh, and Tenth Circuits treat organizational structure—such as independent investigation or multilayered review—as categorically breaking the causal chain. The question presented is as follows: Whether, under Staub v. Proctor Hospital, an employer is categorically insulated from “cat’s paw” liability whenever higher-level officials conduct independent review or share decisionmaking authority, even if a biased subordinate’s act was a proximate cause of the adverse employment action?