Hayes v. Temecula Valley Unified Sch. Dist.

KAREN HAYES, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent.

D073142

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

November 27, 2018

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Super. Ct. No. RIC1512178)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County, Angel M. Bermudez, Judge. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Wagner & Pelayes, Jacob P. Menicucci, Dennis E. Wagner and Tom Yu for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Walsh & Associates, Dennis J. Walsh and Alice Chung for Defendant and Respondent.

Karen Hayes sued the Temecula Valley School District (District), alleging her demotion from middle school principal to middle school teacher violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) because it was motivated by unlawful retaliation, gender discrimination, and/or age discrimination. (Gov. Code, § 12940, subds. (a), (h).)¹ She also claimed the District violated the FEHA because of alleged sexual/gender harassment by several male teachers and by failing to protect her from sexual discrimination and harassment. (§ 12940, subds. (j), (k).) The District successfully moved for summary judgment on all causes of action. Hayes appeals.

We affirm on the discrimination causes of action (retaliation, age, gender). The District proffered evidence showing a legitimate reason for the reassignment, and Hayes did not submit evidence supporting an inference that the reassignment was in retaliation for her prior complaints, or based on her age or gender.

However, we reverse on Hayes's gender harassment and failure-to-protect claims. Viewing the entire summary judgment record, there are triable issues of fact as to whether one or more male District employees created a hostile working environment based on Hayes's gender that was so pervasive that it altered the conditions of her employment. The fact the claimed abusive conduct often took the form of work-related grievances does not, as a matter of law, preclude recovery on the gender harassment cause of action. On the failure-to-protect claim, the record contains evidence the District was aware of complaints that Hayes and other female employees were "targeted due to their gender," but failed to take reasonable steps to prevent this continuing conduct.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Under the applicable review standard, we summarize the factual record in the light most favorable to Hayes, the nonmoving party in the summary judgment proceedings. (Light v. Department of Parks & Recreation (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 75, 81 (Light).) We accept the truth of Hayes's evidence, but not conclusory or speculative assertions unsupported by the admissible evidence. Some of the evidence will be described in more detail when relevant to the legal issues raised by the parties.

FACTUAL SUMMARY

Hayes served as a principal of Margarita Middle School beginning in 2002. During the next 12 years, she received positive performance reviews and prestigious awards for her leadership abilities and administrative skills. Throughout her tenure, she was highly respected and viewed favorably by many teachers, parents, and students.

Beginning in 2010, Hayes had numerous problems with three male teachers: Ray F., Steve C. and Jesus A. These teachers repeatedly challenged Hayes's administrative decisions, and filed numerous frivolous complaints for the sole purpose of harassing her and seeking her removal as principal. One or more of these teachers also badgered many female teachers and school staff members by constantly challenging their work decisions and disagreeing with their methods and activities. The male teachers asserted these complaints in a belligerent and intimidating manner, including yelling or raising their voices at Hayes and other female employees.

Hayes and other employees reported the "harassment" to District officials, including Tim Ritter, the District's superintendent (Superintendent); Henry Voros, theDistrict's former assistant superintendent; and Joe Mueller, the human resources director. Although these officials supported Hayes, the District did not take any effective action to prevent the continuing inappropriate conduct by the male teachers.

In December 2013, Hayes sent a lengthy email to District officials including the Superintendent and human resources director Mueller. The email was titled "Fear for My Site's Safety and Mine As Well." The email described Hayes's belief that teacher Ray was attempting to have her removed as principal by making false accusations against her, and stating that Ray's "aggressive and hostile harassment . . . frighten[s]" her. She said that she was concerned "about his anger and frustration toward me" and was worried that he would "go 'postal.' " Hayes said she appreciated the District's past support in response to Ray's many previous complaints.

In this email, Hayes also detailed the latest incident in which Ray accused her of wrongfully telling a parent that he had contacted child protective services regarding suspected abuse, and Ray asked law enforcement officials to have her arrested. She explained that after the law enforcement officials had spoken with her and Ray, they made clear to Ray that they were not going to arrest her. She said the law enforcement officials "decided that Ray is acting a little crazy and unstable and so they are going to give me extra protection." In the email's final paragraphs, Hayes stated:

"I am not one to be fearful or whine about issues, but at this time I am fearful of what Ray . . . may do to me, my students, and my staff. Through the years he has escalated the magnitude of his 'attacks' on me. He is attempting to destroy my character and my livelihood, which is bad enough, but I now fear for my personal safety. His fixation on 'getting rid of me' scares me; I feel he has become obsessed with me. Though there are 4-5 other females on thiscampus that have felt harassed by him, his main target has definitely been me! Since he never 'attacks' men, we are wondering if he has a sexist issue only with females. The deputies have made some recommendations to me that I will follow. I won't be staying late at work any more because that would require walking in the dark or walking to my car by myself. . . . I will (along with my office staff) be more cognizant of his presence in the front office, especially if he nears my office. They've asked me to keep their phone numbers handy so I contact them right away. [¶] I am notifying you of his recent actions and its impact on my feeling safe at school. Please help me to deal with this situation."

Although the District claims it investigated the incident, it took no action in response to this email to prevent or deter the claimed harassing conduct.

About 11 months after sending this email, in November 2014, Hayes was approached by a female teacher, Jennifer, who was crying because of an incident with Ray. According to Hayes, Jennifer said that Ray was "harassing" her about certain student placements, and "violently slammed his fist on the desk" while repeatedly yelling " 'This is BS!' " in a room "full of middle school students." Jennifer also said that Ray had sent her "harassing" emails. Jennifer indicated she wanted to file a complaint against Ray.

After the District's human resource directors (Mueller and Tiffany Martinez) approved Hayes performing an investigation of this incident, Hayes conducted the investigation, and found some of Jennifer's complaints against Ray to be substantiated. On December 8, 2014, the District's human resources department gave Hayes permission to "write up a verbal warning regarding [Ray's] inappropriate harassment of [Jennifer]." Ten days later, Hayes emailed Ray "the verbal warning." The next day, Ray filed acomplaint against Hayes, asserting various grievances about her administrative decisions including teaching assignments and management of classroom funds.

At about the same time, in November or December 2014, Hayes approached the Superintendent and the assistant superintendent Jodi McClay, stating she "had enough of" the " 'harassment and abuse' " at her school site and she "couldn't take it anymore" and asked for a letter of recommendation because she intended to seek an administrative position at a different school district. Hayes said, "These men [referring to Ray, Steve, and Jesus] are trying to destroy my career. I need to leave the [D]istrict." The District officials said they understood, and agreed to write recommendation letters. McClay said she was sorry "with what you're having to put up with" and would prefer not to " 'lose' " Hayes because she is "one of the best administrators in the [D]istrict." McClay asked whether Hayes wanted to be moved into the District office. Hayes declined the offer, stating, "as long as I'm in the same [D]istrict, it's not going to help." Hayes said that although she understood Ray was a tenured faculty member, "[a]t the very . . . very, very least, [the District could] have a conversation with him about his abusive behavior toward the females on the campus . . . ." She also told another assistant superintendent that "I couldn't take the harassment anymore, that the men that were picking on the women in my school were driving me out of the district . . . ."

On December 17, 2014, the Superintendent wrote a glowing letter of recommendation for Hayes, stating that Hayes "is among the finest educators I have worked with and exemplifies the instructional leadership that any district would want in their district administrators." After detailing her skills and experience, theSuperintendent opined that Hayes "is an exceptional educator who has...