The Appellate Court affirmed, holding that (i) Kreczko failed to establish a prima facie case of unlawful discrimination because it was shown that Kreczko fell short in meeting his legitimate performance expectations, and (ii) Triangle's reason for firing Kreczko was not a pretext for unlawful discrimination.
Further, Kreczko argued that the trial court should have stricken an affidavit of Triangle's president because it was based on his "knowledge, information, and belief" rather than knowledge alone. The Appellate Court held that the trial court correctly let the entire affidavit stand as being made on personal knowledge except for a single paragraph, which was stricken.