With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to rehire her for a new position because of her race. This 'claim is also governed by the McDonnell Douglas bürden-shifting framework. See, e.g., Walker v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 286 F.3d 1270, 1274 (11th Cir.2002). The defendants have asserted that Lewis’s work was unsatisfactory, and Lewis has not come forward with sufficient evidence to show that that explanation is a pretext for race discrimination. Indeed, as for the opening that Lewis applied for and that was initially given to Culverhouse (thus causing outrage in the community), it ultimately went to a black applicant. While there are certainly circumstances in which a failure-to-hire claim may be supported despite the position going to a person of the same race as the plaintiff, see, e.g., Howard, 726 F.2d at 1534-35 (<HOLDING>), Lewis has not provided any evidence

A: holding that where an express contract was in place between plaintiff and defendant that governed the compensation sought by plaintiff plaintiff may not recover under a theory of unjust enrichment
B: holding that the burden is on the plaintiff
C: holding that a plaintiff had established a primafacie failuretohire case notwithstanding evidence that the position sought by the plaintiff was ultimately filled with a person of the same race as the plaintiff
D: holding that the plaintiff established a right to a slogan based on evidence of public recognition of its use by the plaintiff
C.