New Jersey is home to the headquarters of BASF Corporation, which bought another company that recently became the subject of a wrongful termination lawsuit. According to the plaintiff employee, Cognis Corporation–acquired by BASF in 2010–fired him when he declined to accept a continuing employment contract whose terms explicitly precluded him from filing a discrimination lawsuit based on past or even future company action. He had been working for the company for 19 years.

That firing provided the grounds for a wrongful termination claim that the employee filed with the help of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The evidence was so strong in the employee’s favor that last week the judge in the case entered a highly uncommon order for summary judgment in the employee’s favor. In its order, the court noted the rarity of successful summary judgment motions in Title VII retaliation cases.

Summary judgment is a legal mechanism designed to save the parties and the court the burden of going to trial. A court grants summary judgment when there is no reasonable dispute concerning the material facts of the case, therefore obviating the need for a jury to hear the evidence and make a determination in one party’s favor. In the present wrongful termination case, the only issue left to decide is the level of damages that the company will be forced to pay.

According to the EEOC, the employee was not the only one given the Hobson’s choice of signing the employment contract or losing his job. There were a number of other workers who decided to submit to the contract terms, and the EEOC filed a suit on their behalf. But the court declined to grant summary judgment in their favor. That does not mean they have lost, however. It only means that their case will proceed to trial.

Source: U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “EEOC Wins Rare Summary Judgment Verdict in Title VII Retaliation Case,” May 29, 2012.