Duke-Koelfgen v. Alamo Colleges Dist.

1

DONNA DUKE-KOELFGEN, Plaintiff, v. ALAMO COLLEGES DISTRICT, Defendant.

No. SA-22-CV-01010-JKP

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, San Antonio Division

November 1, 2023

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JASON PULLIAM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Before the Court is Defendant Alamo Community College District's (ACCD) Motion for Summary Judgment. ECF Nos. 19,23. Plaintiff Donna Duke-Koelfgen responded. ECF No. 21. Upon consideration, the Motion is GRANTED.

Undisputed Facts

ACCD is a public college district, and thereby, a governmental entity and political subdivision of the State of Texas. See Tex. Educ. Code §§ 130.0011. Duke-Koelfgen is an employee with ACCD since 1993 and is currently employed as a tenured Associate Professor of composition and literature in San Antonio College's English Department.

Full-time faculty members at San Antonio College are professional educators subject to the policies of ACCD's Board of Trustees, including the Faculty Code of Professional Ethics. ECF No. 19, exh. A-2, Job Description; exh. A-3, Code of Professional Ethics. The main categories of job duties for full-time faculty members include: (1) managing classes and learning environments, (2) delivering effective instruction, (3) assessing student learning, (4) promoting continual improvement as part of the cycle of teaching and learning, (5) supporting learning through student engagement, (6) providing student advisement, (7) pursuing professional development, and (8) participating collegially in department and ACCD activities. Ex. A-2. In addition, fulltime faculty must “participate in the shared governance process to ensure policies and procedures remain focused on maintaining high standards while providing appropriate support for student needs.” Id.

In her Amended Complaint, Duke-Koelfgen asserts one cause of action against ACCD: violation of her right to free speech protected by the First Amendment and asserted pursuant to 42 U.S.C § 1983. ECF No. 13, pp. 2-3. As basis for this cause of action, Duke-Koelfgen asserts she received improper disciplinary actions resulting from her exercise of free speech.^[1] Id.

Although the two pertinent disciplinary actions, as revealed in the summary judgment evidence, pertain to several infractions by Duke-Koelfgen, she bases her cause of action on three “issues” contained within the two disciplinary actions. Id. The first disciplinary action titled “Written Reprimand-Step 2” was administered on March 5, 2021. Id.; ECF No. 19, exh. A-4. The second disciplinary action titled “Step 3-Final Written Warning” was administered on October 25, 2021. ECF No. 13, p. 3; ECF No. 19, exh. A-4. The first “issue” upon which Duke-Koelfgen bases her cause of action derives from portions of the first and second disciplinary action; the second “issue” derives from the second disciplinary action, and; the third “issue” derives from the second disciplinary action. Id. The Court will limit analysis of Duke-Koelfgen's cause of action to only the three “issues” she presents.

Duke-Koelfgen bases her first issue upon a portion of the March disciplinary action titled, “While advocating for a student, you engaged in unprofessional written communication and behavior” and a portion of the second disciplinary action titled “Failure to Follow Chain of Command and Unprofessional Communication.” ECF No. 13, p. 3; ECF No. 19, exh. A-4., pp. 32, 48. Both infractions were based upon the same behavior which occurred on two occasions and which was perceived to be improper.

The first infraction which serves as basis for the first issue and which is cited within the first disciplinary action was an email communication chain Duke-Koelfgen sent between February 9 and 12, 2021 to Dean of Student Success Dr Tiffany Cox, San Antonio College President Robert Vela, Vice President of Student Success Dr. Lisa Alcorta, and an email she sent to ACCD General Counsel Ross Laughead on February 12, 2021. ECF No. 13, pp. 2-3; ECF No. 19, exh. A-4., pp 32-46. This February email exchange was about a specific student, Robert, who was forced to drop Duke-Koelfgen's class involuntarily. Id. Duke-Koelfgen also addressed and called for correction of the triggering systemic problem she perceived, that is, financial aid funds from AlamoPromise were not available to students to take her class if the class was not part of their degree plan. Id. In a separate email to Dr. Vela dated February 12, 2021, Duke-Koelfgen wrote “[t]he Core 10 Communication category must be expanded to nine credits to include a literature course of the students choosing. Id. This change is the only way to ensure students their legal right to educational opportunity . . .” Duke-Koelfgen states the current restriction of financial aid funds “disenfranchise[es] students and depriv[es] students of the necessary skills and knowledge to complete all college-level courses.” Id. Duke-Koelfgen stated, “I have emailed the Lieutenant Governor, the House Higher Education Committee, and the Senate Education Committee and ended her email to Dr. Vela with “Now take care of Robert. Enough passing the buck around . . .” Id.

The second infraction which serves as basis for the first issue and which is cited within the second disciplinary action is also based upon emails Duke-Koelfgen sent on September 18 and 19, 2021, to Interim Chair of the English Department Dr. Lennie Irvin, Dean of Academic Success Conrad Krueger, San Antonio College President Dr. Robert Vela, and Alamo Colleges District Chancellor Dr. Mike Flores. ECF No. 13, pp. 2-3; ECF No. 19, exh. A-6., pp. 48-53. These emails pertained to the same systemic issue as before, but a different student. Id. In this email, Duke-Koelfgen expresses her frustration with the student being dropped from her class and the failure to use AlamoPromise funds to ensure students can pay for her class. Duke-Koelfgen contends this student was denied financial resources from AlamoPromise funds based upon her race. Id.

The second “issue” is based upon a portion of the second disciplinary action, titled “Aggressive and Unprofessional Communication. ECF No. 13, p. 3; ECF No. 19, exh. A-6., pp. 4853. This issue is also based upon the September 2021 emails Duke-Koelfgen sent. For this disciplinary action, Dr. Irvin interpreted Duke-Koelfgen's action of copying all other staff in her emails and her disrespect of her supervisor by threatening to lodge a complaint on the student's behalf as aggressive, inappropriate and unprofessional. ECF No. 19, exh. A-6., pp. 48-50.

The third “issue” is based upon a portion of the second disciplinary action titled “Unprofessional Communication” and is based upon a “Reply All” email Duke-Koelfgen sent on September 27, 2021. ECF No. 13, p. 3; ECF No. 19, exh. A-6., pp. 48-53. The email exchange began when Dr. Irvin sent an email to all professors in the English Department asking if any could cover classes for a colleague who was in the hospital and would probably not return. In her Reply, Duke-Koelfgen stated, “Lennie-If this information is not forwarded to the [Board of Trustees] by our department, then I will do it myself. Vela DID NOT practice his legal obligation of duty of care to older faculty and those with underlying conditions during the scheduling phase. The result is unconscionable negligence.” Id. Duke-Koelfgen vaguely alleges the disciplinary action “states that [she] ‘publicly blamed' the college president for the health condition of that sick faculty member.” In this disciplinary action, Duke-Koelfgen was cited for “unthoughtful and unprofessional communication,” making “unfounded and unprofessional accusations against senior leadership,” and for being “disrespectful.” Id.

As a result of the first disciplinary action, ACCD encouraged Duke-Koelfgen to utilize the counseling services available, required specific changes in behavior, required Duke-Koelfgen to take training courses from LinkedIn Learning titled: “Communicating with Diplomacy and Tact,” “Developing Self Awareness,” “Teaching Civility in the Workplace,” and “Interpersonal Communication,” and required Duke-Koelfgen to email an apology to twenty-five ACCD staff while copying the email to Interim Chair Dr. Irvin and ACCD President Dr. Robert Vela. ECF No. 19, exh. A-4., pp. 34-35. As a result of the second disciplinary action, ACCD required Duke-Koelfgen to take training courses titled, “LinkedIn Learning: Anger Management” and “LinkedIn Learning: Developing Your Emotional Intelligence.” Duke-Koelfgen was warned she could be terminated or otherwise disciplined if she continued similar behavior. ECF No. 19, exh. A-6., p. 50. ACCD placed documentation of both disciplinary actions in Duke-Koelfgen's employment record. Duke-Koelfgen maintained the same pay, benefits, duties, academic rank, and position following both actions.

Duke-Koelfgen filed this action against ACCD on September 14, 2022. ECF No. 1. Duke-Koelfgen alleges in her Amended Complaint her actions that are the subject of this suit were protected speech, and, as a result, ACCD unlawfully disciplined and punished her by requiring her to take the online training courses, requiring her emailed and approved apology, and placing these infractions in her employment record. ECF No. 19. As relief, Duke-Koelfgen seeks nominal damages, punitive damages, attorney fees, and permanent removal of all disciplinary infractions from her employment records. ACCD seeks summary judgment.

Legal Standard

Summary judgment is appropriate if the record shows “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P 56(a); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986); see also Rodriguez v. Pacificare, Inc., 980 F.2d 1014, 1019 (5th...