In Martinez v. UPMC Susquehanna, the plaintiff doctor sued after he was fired without much explanation and replaced by two younger doctors. The District Court dismissed his age-discrimination suit, treating his complaint’s allegation that his replacements were “significantly younger” as a legal conclusion. The 3rd Circuit reversed, ruling that the phrase “significantly younger” was a factual allegation, not a legal one. The 3rd Circuit first noted that, to survive a motion to dismiss, the complaint need only allege enough facts to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of each necessary element. The 3rd Circuit then held that the factual allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint — he was over forty years old, qualified for the job, fired and not rehired, and his replacements were not only “significantly younger,” but also less qualified and experienced — made out a prima facie case.
