LISBON — A lawsuit filed against the city of Salem last year by a former police dispatcher alleging gender discrimination and a hostile work environment has been dismissed, with the city’s motion for summary judgment granted.

Joshua Kruegel, Salem, was terminated as a police dispatcher on April 5, 2023 and named not just the city, but also police Chief J.T. Panezott and then dispatcher Lindsay Fraas as defendants in the case.

Besides the gender discrimination and hostile work environment claims against the city, the lawsuit accused all of the defendants of alleged retaliation and Fraas and Panezott of alleged unlawful aiding, abetting and inciting of discrimination.

An attorney for the city filed the motion for summary judgment requesting the case be dismissed and explaining that Kruegel was terminated for a non-discriminatory reason based on a violation of the policy regulating the surreptitious use of portable audio/video recorders.

Washam wrote that Kruegel met with the Salem mayor and the city law director on March 20, 2023 and produced a recording he made of another dispatcher with the city, admitting “that he recorded the conversation surreptitiously and without the permission of Chief Panezott.”

“Chief Panezott testified that the conduct of Mr. Kruegel in secretly recording another city of Salem employee in direct violation of Policy 424.5.2 was not acceptable and warranted immediate termination. On the basis of the secret recording, Chief Panezott went to the safety service director and gave his recommendation. The safety service director agreed with the recommendation and Mr. Kruegel was terminated from his employment with the city of Salem,” Washam wrote.

He said the city’s explanation was clear and specific and satisfied the city’s burden to show a non-discriminatory reason for discharging the employee.

“An employer must only raise a genuine issue of material fact that unlawful discrimination was not the motivation for its actions,” Washam said.

As a result of that, the burden fell back to the plaintiff, Kruegel, to show that the city’s reason was a “pretext masking the true discriminatory intent.” Washam found that Kruegel’s claims that the policy didn’t apply to him were “legally lacking.”

He also noted there was no evidence that the city’s reason for termination was false or factually untrue.

Washam found in favor of the city’s motion for summary judgment and dismissal on all claims made by Kruegel, including the claims of gender discrimination, hostile work environment, alleged retaliation and alleged unlawful aiding, abetting and inciting of discrimination.

He had alleged that he complained about discrimination and no corrective action was taken and then talked with city officials and claimed he was retaliated against as a result. He claimed he was terminated without just cause based on his gender.

The case had been set for a pretrial and jury trial this month, but those have been canceled as a result of the judgment, which was based on the filings and the motion for summary judgment and the plaintiff’s response to the motion.