Judge Dismisses Race Discrimination Suit Against Lhoist Due to Lack of Evidence on Qualifications and Comparators

FORT WORTH (LN) — A federal judge in Texas granted summary judgment on Friday, dismissing a truck driver's race discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against Lhoist North America of Texas, LLC, after finding the plaintiff offered no evidence that he was qualified for the promotions he sought or that white drivers were similarly situated.

U.S. District Judge Mark T. Pittman ruled that Bell, a Black employee at the company's McKinney terminal, could not establish a prima facie case under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework because he failed to provide specific details about the qualifications of the white colleagues he claimed were treated more favorably.

Bell alleged that Lhoist discriminated against him by denying him promotions and assigning him the "last load" of the day, which often forced drivers to wash trucks or return early the next morning. He also claimed he faced retaliation after asking a dispatcher if he was being assigned loads because of his race.

The court noted that while Bell identified several white drivers who allegedly avoided certain tasks or received new trucks, he provided no information regarding their job responsibilities, past performance, or other attributes that would render them "nearly identical" to him.

"Even if Lhoist treated these drivers favorably like Bell argues, Bell fails to identify sufficient evidence that shows that these drivers are similarly situated," Judge Pittman wrote.

Regarding the retaliation claim, the court found Bell failed to show he engaged in protected activity because he never filed a formal complaint with management or Human Resources, and his informal questions to a non-manager dispatcher did not constitute opposition to unlawful discrimination.

Judge Pittman further determined that the alleged adverse actions, including a single disciplinary write-up for seatbelt and cell phone violations and the placement of pre-trip inspection tags, were de minimis workplace trifles that did not meaningfully alter the terms of Bell's employment.

Bell voluntarily resigned in May 2021, telling a healthcare provider he left due to family difficulties, before filing his initial complaint in August 2024 and amending it in March 2025.

The dismissal with prejudice leaves Bell without a federal forum for his claims, as the court found no genuine dispute of material fact regarding his qualifications or the comparability of his white coworkers.