Hughes v. Mayoral

721 F.Supp.2d 947

Scott HUGHES, Plaintiff,

v.Bobby MAYORAL; Waikiki Sand Villa Hotel, Inc.; Principle Hotels, LLC; and Doe Defendants 1-50, Defendants.

Civil No. 09-00386 JMS/BMK.

United States District Court,D. Hawai‘i.

June 24, 2010.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.

Michael Jay Green, Te-Hina Te-Moana Ickes, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff.

Anne T. Horiuchi, Carolyn K. Wong, Goodsill Anderson Quinn & Stifel LLP, Honolulu, HI, for Defendants.

ORDER (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART WAIKIKI SAND VILLA HOTEL'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND (3) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MAYORAL'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Scott Hughes (“Plaintiff”), a former security guard/bellman at the Waikiki Sand Villa Hotel, Inc. (the “Hotel”), asserts claims against his employer, Principle Hotels, LLC (“Principle Hotels”) and the Hotel (collectively, “Hotel Defendants”) for discrimination and sexual harassment/hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), and state law claims against Hotel Defendants and Plaintiff's co-worker Bobby Mayoral (“Mayoral”) (collectively, “Defendants”), for various state law claims.

Currently before the court are three Motions for Summary Judgment, including (1) Defendants' Motion as to all claims; (2) the Hotel's Motion as to all claims against it and for back pay; and (3) Mayoral's Motion as to the state law claims alleged against him. ¹ For the following reasons, the court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part each of Defendants' Motions.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background

Principle Hotels manages the Hotel's operations and employs all of the Hotel's employees. Doc. No. 35-4, Sheldon Yoshida Decl. ¶¶ 2-3. The Hotel has no employees of its own and is a separate corporation from Principle Hotels. Id. ¶ 3.

On February 22, 2008 Principle Hotels hired Plaintiff as a security guard at the Hotel. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 2. Around this time, Plaintiff received Principle Hotel's employee handbook. See Doc. No. 32-3, Defs.' Ex. A at Pl.'s Depo. 170:17-22. The employee handbook explains certain rules, the violation of which will result in discipline up to and including discharge. See id. at Pl.'s Depo. Ex. 10. These rules prohibit, among other things:

1. Insubordination....

2. Use of profane or abusive language when used maliciously against another employee and/or when it constitutes insubordination.

3. Fighting or attempting bodily injury to another employee.

Id. In addition to these rules, Plaintiff, as a security guard, was held to higher performance expectations than other employees, including that he handle conflicts with coworkers in a non-threatening manner and not instigate unnecessary confrontations with his coworkers. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 21; see also Doc. No. 32-23, Defs.' Ex. R (describing security guard position).

During Plaintiff's employment, there were two incidents between Plaintiff and Mayoral, a Hotel valet. In the first incident, in 2006, Plaintiff was working as a bellman and assisted a Caucasian family with their luggage to their vehicle, where Mayoral was working. The family failed to tip Mayoral and after they drove off, Mayoral yelled, “F---ing white Americans, because I'm a f---ing Filipino, they're not going to tip me, prejudiced f---ing Americans.” Doc. No. 32-3, Defs.' Ex. A at Pl.'s Depo. 54:6-55:19. The next day, Mayoral asked Plaintiff to forget about the incident, but also apparently reported some alleged wrongdoing by Plaintiff to the night manager. Id. at 56:18-57:17. When the night manager spoke with Plaintiff about his alleged wrongdoing, Plaintiff reported the incident with Mayoral. Id. After this incident, Plaintiff stopped talking to and avoided Mayoral. Id. at 55:24-56:6.

Plaintiff and Mayoral were involved in a second incident on August 31, 2008. According to Plaintiff, in the early morning, he followed a vehicle into the garage to inform the driver about the Hotel's valet procedures. See Doc. No. 32-5, Defs.' Ex. A, Pl.'s Depo. at Ex. 8. Upon reaching the vehicle, Plaintiff realized the driver was Mayoral and walked away. Id. Mayoral allegedly jumped out of the vehicle and confronted Plaintiff, trying to start a fight. Plaintiff walked away from Mayoral to the Hotel lobby, and Mayoral followed, pushing Plaintiff and calling him a “f---ing ahole faggot.” Id.; Doc. No. 32-3, Defs.' Ex. A, Pl.'s Depo. at 66:3-4, 64:24-65:9. While Mayoral was pushing him, Plaintiff called his supervisor, Benjamin Tsui, seeking his assistance in getting Mayoral to leave. Id. at Pl.'s Depo. 69:5-11. When the two men reached the lobby, a couple of customers at the bar stepped in and confronted Mayoral. Defs.' Ex. A, Pl.'s Depo. at 66:3-13. Mayoral walked away, but yelled to Plaintiff that he would be back to fight Plaintiff at 6:00 a.m. when Plaintiff finished his shift. Id.

Just prior to 6:00 a.m., a Hotel employee relayed to Plaintiff a message from Mayoral that he was back at the Hotel to “kick [Plaintiff's] f---ing faggot ass.” Id. at 76:12-77:5. Plaintiff again called Tsui to intervene and ask Mayoral to leave. Id. at 76:23-77:5. At 6:00 a.m., Plaintiff punched out of work, saw Mayoral waiting for him, and proceeded to his truck. Id. at 78:2-12. While Plaintiff started his truck, Mayoral confronted Plaintiff, yelling slurs and trying to fight Plaintiff. Id. at 78:12-20. Plaintiff refused to fight and drove away in his truck. Id. at 78:21-79:2; Doc. No. 32-5, Defs.' Ex. A at Pl.'s Depo. Ex. 8.

On September 1, 2009, General Manager Sheldon Yoshida (“Yoshida”) learned of the incident and instructed Tsui to gather information from Plaintiff, Mayoral, and any witnesses. See Doc. No. 32-7, Defs.' Ex. B at 1. Plaintiff described the incident in a written statement, Defs.' Ex. A at Pl.'s Depo. Ex. 8, but did not complain to anyone in management about any alleged sexual harassment. See Doc. No. 32-3, Defs.' Ex. A at 135:3-7. After reviewing the witness statements and the video footage from the garage to the lobby, Yoshida concluded there was no conclusive evidence showing who was responsible for the argument. Doc. No. 32-7, Defs.' Ex. B at 2; Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 5. Mayoral provided a very different version of events than Plaintiff, see Doc. No. 32-7, Defs.' Ex. B at Mayoral Statement, and other witness statements did not fully corroborate Plaintiff's version of events. Id. at Andrew Alce Statement, Kahukina Pearce Statement, Rey Gascon Statement, “Kino” Statement. Yoshida therefore decided to write up both Plaintiff and Mayoral for arguing on Hotel property and warn them that if another incident occurs they would be terminated. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 5.

On September 8, 2008, Mayoral received his written warning, including a warning that he would be terminated “if this happens again.” See id. ¶ 6; Doc. No. 32-11, Defs.' Ex. F. Yoshida is not aware of any complaints about Mayoral other than from Plaintiff, and Yoshida has received no complaints about Mayoral since the August 31, 2008 incident. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 6.

On September 9, 2008, Yoshida and Tsui met with Plaintiff to discuss the August 31, 2008 incident, as well as the fact that Yoshida had received reports about Plaintiff confronting other employees. Id. ¶ 7; Doc. No. 32-3, Defs.' Ex. A at Pl.'s Depo. 82:8-17. Yoshida told Plaintiff that he was being charged with fighting and that another violation would result in termination. See Doc. No. 32-3, Defs.' Ex. A at Pl.'s Depo. 83:2-7. Yoshida further advised Plaintiff that if he has a problem with an employee, he should bring it up with management rather than confront the employee himself. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 7; see also Doc. No. 32-12, Defs.' Ex. G. Plaintiff became upset about Yoshida's decision and explained that the August 31, 2008 incident had caused him stress and that he was afraid to go to work. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 7; see also Doc. No. 32-13, Defs.' Ex. H. Plaintiff left without receiving his written warning and was on sick leave until September 19, 2008. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 8; see also Doc. No. 32-13, Defs.' Ex. H.

Around the time of this meeting with Plaintiff, Yoshida was notified of at least three other incidents involving Plaintiff. On September 1, 2008, Hector Torres, a server, reported that Plaintiff confronted him about Torres' performance as a server, yelling at him and asking him if he “wanted to start something.” Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 4; see also Doc. No. 32-9, Defs.' Ex. D, Doc. No. 32-13, Defs.' Ex. H. Yoshida also learned of two alleged altercations Plaintiff had with desk clerk William Finley. In the first, on August 24, 2008, Finley allegedly asked Plaintiff to fill out an incident report that the towel dispenser in the men's lobby restroom was broken. In response, Plaintiff allegedly yelled and cursed at Finley while a customer was present, telling Finley, “Who do you think you[ ] are?! You['re] nothing to me!! ... Who the fuck do you think you are?!” See Doc. No. 32-8, Defs.' Ex. C at 1; see also Doc. No. 32-13, Defs.' Ex. H. In the second incident, on September 7, 2008, Plaintiff again allegedly yelled at Finley, calling him an idiot and asserting that he should not work at the Hotel. See Doc. No. 32-8, Defs.' Ex. C at 2; see also Doc. No. 32-13, Defs.' Ex. H; Doc. No. 32-14, Defs.' Ex. I (listing incidents involving Plaintiff).

On September 10, 2008, Plaintiff came to the Hotel to meet with police and give a statement regarding charges he was filing against Mayoral. See Doc. No. 32-13, Defs.' Ex. H. Yoshida met Plaintiff at the Hotel lobby and told Plaintiff that he would have to meet with police in a conference room as opposed to in the lobby. Doc. No. 32-6, Yoshida Decl. ¶ 9. When Plaintiff...