Attorneys obtained summary judgment in favor of a Township on four police officers' claims that they were subjected to Age Discrimination

Attorneys obtained summary judgment in favor of a Township on four police officers' claims that they were subjected to Age Discrimination. The lawsuit had been pending for five years and reflected ongoing contention between the Township and the police department. The police officers claimed that the Township discriminated against younger officers when it promoted 3 officers to sergeant positions. They contended that they were better qualified for the positions, that the Township failed to gather background information about younger officers, that a prior chief's alleged discriminatory acts were attributed to the Township, and that one's supervisor's use of the term "good old boys" created disputes of fact for trial. The court firmly rejected the officers' claims and held that the Township Board of Supervisors was under no duty to go out of its way to recruit them for the position. It rejected the argument that "good old boys" refers to age and instead cited Webster's definition of the term as slang for members of a clique. The court addressed each of the officers' claims of pretext and direct evidence of discrimination and stated several times that the theories were "absurd" or that they did not make sense.