Cortez-hernandez v. Centennial P.R.

IRVING CORTEZ-HERNANDEZ Plaintiff

v.CENTENNIAL PUERTO RICO Defendant

Civil No. 09-1333 (SEC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

Filed: November 18, 2010

OPINION AND ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant Centennial Puerto Rico's ("Defendant" or "Centennial") Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket # 36), and Plaintiff Irving CortezHernandez's ("Plaintiff" or "Cortez") opposition thereto (Docket # 44). Defendant replied (Docket # 51), and Plaintiff sur-replied (Docket # 56). After carefully considering the filings and the applicable law, Defendant's motion is GRANTED.

Procedural Background

On April 8, 2009, Plaintiff filed the present suit under Title VII, the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and several state laws, alleging that Defendant discriminated against him, and eventually terminated him because of his religious beliefs. Docket # 1. After discovery concluded, Defendant filed the present motion arguing that Plaintiff failed to set forth a prima facie case of religious discrimination, or show that Defendant's proffered reason for his dismissal was a pretext for discrimination. Defendant further contends that Plaintiff was terminated for legitimate business reasons, i.e., Plaintiff's misconduct. Lastly, Defendant avers that the record is devoid of evidence showing that Plaintiff suffered discrimination because of his religious beliefs. Plaintiff opposed, arguing that Defendant conspired against him due to his religious beliefs, and dismissed him despite his excellent performance. According to Plaintiff he was terminated solely because of his religion.

Standard of Review

The Court may grant a motion for summary judgment when "the pleadings, depositions answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Rule 56(c); see also Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986); Ramirez Rodriguez v. Boehringer Ingelheim, 425 F.3d 67, 77 (1^st Cir. 2005). In reaching such a determination, the Court may not weigh the evidence. Casas Office Machs., Inc. v. Mita Copystar Am., Inc., 42 F.3d 668 (1^st Cir. 1994). At this stage, the court examines the record in the "light most favorable to the nonmovant," and indulges all "reasonable inferences in that party's favor." Maldonado-Denis v. Castillo-Rodriguez, 23 F.3d 576, 581 (1^st Cir. 1994).

Once the movant has averred that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to establish the existence of at least one fact in issue that is both genuine and material. Garside v. Osco Drug, Inc., 895 F.2d 46, 48 (1^st Cir. 1990) (citations omitted). "A factual issue is 'genuine' if 'it may reasonably be resolved in favor of either party and, therefore, requires the finder of fact to make 'a choice between the parties' differing versions of the truth at trial.'" DePoutout v. Raffaelly, 424 F.3d 112, 116 (1^st Cir. 2005)(citing Garside, 895 F.2d at 48 (1^st Cir. 1990)); see also SEC v. Ficken, 546 F.3d 45, 51

(1^st Cir. 2008).

In order to defeat summary judgment, the opposing party may not rest on conclusory allegations, improbable inferences, and unsupported speculation. See Hadfield v. McDonough 407 F.3d 11, 15 (1^st Cir. 2005) (citing Medina-Munoz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 896 F.2d 5, 8 (1^st Cir. 1990). Nor will "effusive rhetoric" and "optimistic surmise" suffice to establish a genuine issue of material fact. Cadle Co. v. Hayes, 116 F.3d 957, 960 (1^st Cir. 1997). Once the party moving for summary judgment has established an absence of material facts in dispute, and that he or she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the "party opposing summary judgment must present definite, competent evidence to rebut the motion." Mendez-Laboy v. Abbot Lab. 424 F.3d 35, 37 (1^st Cir. 2005) (citing Maldonado-Denis v. Castillo Rodriguez, 23 F.3d 576, 581 (1^st Cir. 1994).

"The non-movant must 'produce specific facts, in suitable evidentiary form' sufficient to limn a trial-worthy issue.... Failure to do so allows the summary judgment engine to operate at full throttle." Id; see also Kelly v. United States, 924 F.2d 355, 358 (1^st Cir. 1991) (warning that "the decision to sit idly by and allow the summary judgment proponent to configure the record is likely to prove fraught with consequence."); Medina-Munoz, 896 F.2d at 8 (citing Mack v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 871 F.2d 179, 181 (1^st Cir. 1989)) (holding that "[t]he evidence illustrating the factual controversy cannot be conjectural or problematic; it must have substance in the sense that it limns differing versions of the truth which a factfinder must resolve.").

Applicable Law and Analysis

The relevant uncontested facts are as follows.

Centennial's Policies and Procedures

Centennial is a corporation dedicated to providing broadline and wireless communications services. Defendant's Statement of Uncontested Facts ("SUF") ¶ 1. Centennial is also an Equal Opportunity Employer. Id at 2. During all periods relevant to the above-captioned complaint, Centennial maintained an antidiscrimination policy that proscribes discrimination based on an employee's race, color, religion, age, sex, disability, or any other illegal motive in the workplace, as provided in Centennial's Associates Manual. Id Said anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies were published during all relevant periods in conspicuous places within the Company including bulleting boards, employee lounges and Centennial's intranet. Id. at 6. Also, while Plaintiff worked at Centennial, the Company posted signs and posters at all work areas publicizing to its employees all applicable employment legislation, including antidiscrimination statutes, as required by law. Id

Centennial also strives to provide all of its employees with a safe work environment, free of harassment, hostility and violence, where all employees and customers are treated with dignity and respect. Id. at 3. Depending on the nature and severity of the transgressions, violations to the policies contained in Centennial's Associates Manual could be penalized with termination. Id. at 4. According to the Associates Manual, an employee must show good judgment, consideration of others and respect at the workplace. Id. at 5. If an employee's conduct affects the workplace, the employee may be disciplined by verbal warnings, written warnings, suspension, or termination, depending on the seriousness of conduct, and taking into consideration said employee's record, the effect on customers and/or other employees and other surrounding circumstances. Id.

Since 2005, Centennial has terminated more than 500 employees. Plaintiff's Additional Uncontested Facts ("AUF") | ¶.

Cortez's Work History

Cortez started working at Centennial on December 10, 1997, as an Inside Sales Representative ("ISR") in Mayaguez. SUF at 7.¹ Throughout his employment with Centennial he always held the ISR position. Id. Plaintiff worked in Centennial's kiosks until 2004; thereafter, he worked at the Centennial store located in the Mayaguez Mall. Id. As an ISR, Cortez's main responsibility was to sell Centennial's services and products at its stores and sales kiosks. Id. He worked at Centennial for more than a decade. AUF at 1.

In April 2005, Cortez reported that Lymarie Torres ('Torres"), another ISR at the Mayaguez store, misappropriated commissions from a sale performed by him. AUF at 8. After an inquiry on this matter, on April 25, 2005, the Human Resources Department issued a Summary Report, prepared and signed by Angela Ramos Jackson ("Ramos"), Centennial's Human Resources Senior Manager. Id. Pursuant to the report, Torres was confronted by her supervisor at the time, Milca Maldonado, to discuss the incident alleged by Cortez, as well as three (3) other similar incidents. Id. Based upon Torres and Cortez's statements, the report concluded that Torres had engaged in misconduct and that the commissions in controversy should be assigned to Cortez. Id. Accordingly, the report stated that Torres would be notified of the outcome of the investigation. Id.

Human Resources' Investigation

Ramos was Centennial's Human Resources Senior Manager until March 9, 2010. SUF at 9. As part of her responsibilities, Ramos dealt with discipline counseling, internal grievances and investigations, involuntary terminations, recruitment, and the supervision of Centennial's human resources personnel. Id. Leslie Velez ("Velez") was, at all times relevant to this complaint, and currently continues to work as Centennial's Human Resources Specialist. Id. at 10. She counsels management in, among other matters, the application of Centennial's antidiscrimination and antiharassment policies and the determination of appropriate counseling and/or discipline for employees. Id. She also conducts internal investigations of complaints presented to the Human Resources Department via calls, letters or through the channels provided in Centennial's antidiscrimination and antiharassment policies. Id. As part of these investigations, Velez interviews the employees that may have information pertinent to the investigation, takes notes of the interview, and asks the employees/witnesses to review her notes and sign them if they reflect what was stated during the interview. Id. at 11. These notes are then used in considering the appropriate measures to be applied. Id.

From March to April 2008, the Human Resources Department received three (3) complaints from employees in the Mayaguez Store related to their work environment. Id. at 12. The first letter dated March 13, 2008 was sent by Torres, who complained, among others, that Cortez was harassing her. Id. at 13. Prior to this letter, there were no complaints filed against Cortez. AUF at 4. Jeffrey De Jesus ("De Jesus"), Manager of the Mayaguez Store, sent Torres'...