A fifty-three-year old director of an assisted living facility was terminated. Top managers regularly made statements such as Silver Oak should be a “youth oriented company,” there was “no room for dead wood,” Silver Oak was a “young company” that “enjoy[s] hiring energetic people,” the company was “missing the boat by not hiring more younger, vibrant people,” and that employees “should start looking over applications better and try to consider hiring younger people.” On several occasions, the director was pressed to discipline and terminate older employees, which she refused to do. Following her refusal, she was disciplined and placed on indefinite probation for allegedly admitting a patient without permission and terminating an employee without having another administrator present. However, the director claims that she did receive permission to admit the patient and that the administrator who would have been present for the termination told her she did not want to attend. The director was eventually terminated. She had been on an approved medical leave for several weeks. Her supervisor told her that he wanted her to call in every day while she was on medical leave. She did not do that. She was initially told that she was terminated for failing to call in each day, but the list of reasons for termination was subsequently expanded, with different administrators citing different reasons. The terminated director sued. What should the court decide? Why?