Dalton v. Bd. of Educ. for Mount Vernon Twp. High Sch. Dist. 201

162 F.Supp.3d 807

Joyce Dalton, Plaintiff,

v.Board of Education for, Mount Vernon Township High School District 201, Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-1160-MJR-PMF

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois.

Signed February 11, 2016

Jonathan D. Karmel, Joshua N. Karmel, The Karmel Law Firm, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff.

Joseph G. Skryd, James J. Temple, Mulherin, Rehfeldt et al., Wheaton, IL, Ashley D. Jaconetti, Mulherin, Rehfeldt, Park Ridge, IL, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

REAGAN, Chief District Judge:

Joyce Dalton began working as an assistant principal at the Mt. Vernon Township High School in August 2010. In March 2013, Dalton resigned, purportedly because the superintendent told her that if she didn't resign she would be terminated by the Board at its upcoming hearing and face other repercussions linked to a discrimination charge she started with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In 2014, Ingram filed suit against Mt. Vernon Township High School in this Court, claiming that the school discriminated against her based on her race and gender and retaliated against her for filing a charge with the Commission. The Board has now moved for summary judgment on all of Dalton's claims, arguing that she has insufficient evidence to make out a discrimination or retaliation claim. For the reasons stated below, the Board's motion is granted in part and denied in part.

Background

Dalton, an African American female, was hired in August 2010 by the Board to serve as the Assistant Principal for Attendance, Student Discipline, and Campus Supervision at the Mt. Vernon Township High School. Dalton remained at Mt. Vernon until her resignation in March 2013. Dalton was one of five assistant principals working at the high school—the school assigned each assistant principal to various areas, with Dalton responsible for security, attendance, discipline, and other related matters. When Dalton first began working at the school, Dalton's supervisor was Principal Ron Daniels, but that changed in July 2011, when Daniels departed and Wesley Olson was hired to serve as principal in his stead. Daniels and Olson reported to the district superintendent, Dr. Michael Smith, throughout Dalton's tenure.

The circumstances (and motivators) of Dalton's departure depend upon who you ask. The Board flags a number of problems with Dalton's job performance at the school, one localized to 2010 and many occurring after Principal Olson's arrival in 2011. When Dalton began working at the school in 2010, she interpreted the dress code to mean that camouflage was prohibited because it could be viewed as a gang symbol—and based on that interpretation she sent students home from school to change into more appropriate attire. That interpretation didn't fly well with parents and students in southern Illinois, and parent complaints drew community and local media attention. The complaints led the superintendent to discuss the matter with Dalton and advise her that, while she was to use her judgment in enforcing the high school's dress code, she should be careful about creating a gang problem where no known problem existed.

The Board claims that Dalton's problems continued after Principal Olson was hired in July 2011. Olson received some additional complaints related to Dalton's interaction with students and parents in 2011: he investigated them, allegedly spoke to Dalton about them, and set some of them aside as frivolous. That said, he determined that others—namely a few complaints linked to Dalton's communication with parents and one complaint linked to a physical altercation with a student—had merit.

The Board says that the complaints about Dalton continued into the 2012 to 2013 school year, reaching an apex when Dalton approached a school board member and the school's resource officer to get out of a traffic ticket she received in mid-2012. All involved dispute large portions of Dalton's contact with officials concerning the ticket: Hawkins testified that Dalton offered him $100 to get her out of the ticket; Dalton admits that she approached him but characterized the bribe as a joke; Olson suggests that he regarded the event as bad judgment but admits that the bribe could have been a joke; and the superintendent says that he took Dalton's exchanges with Hawkins and the board member very seriously, characterizing her discussions as poor judgment.

For her part, Dalton says that the complaints against her were largely groundless, and that she was exposed to discrimination based on her gender and race since Olson took over as principal. She claims that Olson made constant comments from 2012 onward that he wanted a male in the attendance office: in April 2012, he said that the male coach of the football team should be moved to that office; and in November 2012, he said that the female attendance clerk should be moved to another position because they needed a man in that office. Dalton also says that Olson often referred to African Americans as “you people” when speaking with Dalton—he referred to African Americans as “you people” when Dalton complained about a secretary's treatment of an African American student, and he would refer to African American students as “you people” when discussing them generally with Dalton

Olson's comments were not the only thing Dalton found objectionable—she also claims that she was treated differently than other assistant principals by Olson and other officials throughout her tenure at Mt. Vernon High School. For one, a video camera was installed in Dalton's office but no one else's in 2012. When Dalton asked why the camera was installed, Olson laughed and told her that she was a “tough one,” and the superintendent told her that the camera was for her safety because she dealt primarily with discipline issues. Dalton found that explanation curious, given that other employees often dealt with student discipline but didn't have cameras installed in their offices or duty stations. In addition, Dalton claims that Olson reassigned many of her responsibilities and often overturned her decisions—something he didn't do to other principals. Once more, Dalton claims that Olson and possibly others denied her core competency training that other assistant principals received.

On November 19, 2012, Principal Olson sent the superintendent a memo documenting Dalton's purported deficiencies, including problems related to Dalton's timeliness, her availability, her communications with parents and students, and other matters. Dalton says she challenged the bona fides of that letter and asked to speak to the Board, but she was rebuffed, and the Board took that information into account when it decided to give all other assistant principals pay increases but her.

In February 2013, the superintendent prepared a summative performance evaluation for Dalton, receiving input along the way from Olson and other assistant principals. The superintendent gave the report to Dalton sometime in February 2013—precisely when the parties seem to dispute—and told her that he would recommend to the Board that her contract not be renewed for the following year. After she received the evaluation, Dalton allegedly contacted the superintendent, again challenged the accuracy of the statements in the evaluation, and claimed that Principal Olson was targeting her for discriminatory reasons. Dalton also contacted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and filled out a charge questionnaire. On February 27, 2013, Dalton followed up by submitting a letter to the superintendent, telling him that she would present her evidence to the Board at its March 2013 meeting and would request resignation in lieu of termination if the Board decided to terminate her. The superintendent told her it would be a waste of time to go to the Board, but if she resigned and spared all the trouble, he would help her find other employment.

On the same day that Dalton submitted her follow-up letter, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sent a notice of charge of discrimination to the school, seemingly prompted by Dalton's February 2013 charge questionnaire. According to Dalton, that led Smith to meet with her on March 7, 2013: he confronted her regarding her agency charge; told her that because she had filed the charge he could no longer accept her provisional February 27, 2013 letter of resignation; explained that he would prepare a letter of resignation that Dalton must sign before the Board meeting instead if she wanted to resign; and told her that pursuing the charge with the Commission would hurt her career given his contacts in southern Illinois. Dalton received the letter allegedly prepared by the superintendent on March 15, 2013, and signed it. That same day, she submitted her finalized charge to the Commission. Dalton was ultimately replaced by Rowdy Fatheree, a Caucasian male.

On July 29, 2014, the Commission sent Dalton a right to sue letter, telling her that it was unable to determine whether there was a violation. Dalton then filed a complaint against Mt. Vernon High School in federal court, alleging race discrimination, gender discrimination, and retaliation pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, and the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. § 1981. She amended the complaint once to name the Board of Education for Mt. Vernon instead of the high school. Discovery has concluded and the Board has moved for summary judgment, claiming that Dalton has no actionable discrimination or retaliation claims.

Discussion

This case presents a thicket of motions: the Board has moved to dismiss the amended complaint, has moved for summary judgment, and has moved to strike a declaration that Dalton attached to her response to the Board's motion for summary judgment. The Court granted in part and denied in part the Board's motion to dismiss: the Court ruled that Dalton's § 1981 claims should be dismissed for want of custom or policy allegations directed at the Board, but...