Testimony from Plaintiff that she was told the reason she was not selected for a promotion because the department’s executive was suspected of sexually harassing female employees serves as direct evidence of sex discrimination to defeat a motion for summary judgment.

“The Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff’s Title VII discrimination claim is supported by direct evidence, based upon her conversation with Mr. Nowzaradan, wherein he stated she was not promoted to the development department due to his concern that she would be sexually harassed there. While Defendants offered evidence to rebut this conclusion, it is not appropriate to make credibility determinations at the summary judgment stage. The Magistrate Judge’s determination that a genuine issue of material fact exists with regard to Plaintiff’s Title VII claim is not clearly erroneous. Accordingly, summary judgment is DENIED as to this issue.” 2016 WL 1441809, at *2.

Schutte v. Megalomedia, Inc., No. 1:24-CV-890-DAE, 2016 WL 1441809 (W.D. Tex. Apr. 12, 2016) (Ezra, J.).