Troland$$s e$-$mail to Cavagnero, Troland$$s statement to University EEO officer, and

Cavagnero$$s and other professors$$ deposition testimony provide circumstantial

evidence of discriminatory intent among the members of the search committee

permitting the application of the McDonnell$-$Douglass shifting burden of proof.

$2.$ Because Gaskell has provided substantial evidence that UK$$s reasons were a pretext

for discrimination, the University of Kentucky$$s motion for summary judgment must

be granted.

$3.$ Summary judgment should be granted to UK because UK could not reasonably

accommodate his religious beliefs in an outreach position which would allow him to

use his affiliations with UK to promote his religious beliefs.

$4.$ Gaskell pursued a disparate impact employment discrimination or mixed motives

discrimination claim, rather than a disparate treatment claim of employment

discrimination.

$5.$ If Gaskell$$s allegations are true and are established by a preponderance of evidence

at trial, Gaskell is entitled to compensatory damages, but will likely not be

successful in claiming punitive damages