Moore v. Bolivar Cnty.

ISADORE SAMUEL MOORE PLAINTIFF v. BOLIVAR COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, and BRENDA COOK DEFENDANTS

NO. 4:15-CV-145-DMB-JMV

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION

December 1, 2017

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Following his termination as an alcohol and drug counselor at Bolivar County Regional Correctional Facility, Isadore Samuel Moore sued Bolivar County, his former employer, and Brenda Cook, his former supervisor, asserting claims of sex discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation, and malicious interference with employment. Bolivar County and Cook have each moved for summary judgment. For the reasons below, Bolivar County's summary judgment motion will be granted in part and denied in part; and Cook's summary judgment motion will be denied.

IStandard of Review

"Summary judgment is proper only when the record demonstrates that no genuine issue of material fact exists and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Luv N' Care Ltd. v. Groupo Rimar, 844 F.3d 442, 447 (5th Cir. 2016). "A factual issue is genuine if the evidence is sufficient for a reasonable jury to return a verdict for the non-moving party, and material if its resolution could affect the outcome of the action." Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., 798 F.3d 222, 226 (5th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted). On a motion for summary judgment, a court must "consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and draw all reasonable inferences in its favor." Edwards v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 841 F.3d 360, 363 (5th Cir. 2016).

In seeking summary judgment, "[t]he moving party bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, and identifying those portions of the record which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact." Nola Spice Designs, L.L.C. v. Haydel Enters., Inc., 783 F.3d 527, 536 (5th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). If the moving party satisfies this burden, "the non-moving party must go beyond the pleadings and by her own affidavits, or by the depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, designate specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). "Where the nonmoving party bears the burden of proof at trial, the moving party satisfies this initial burden by demonstrating an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case." Celtic Marine Corp. v. James C. Justice Cos., Inc., 760 F.3d 477, 481 (5th Cir. 2014).

IIFactual Background

A. James Moore's Tenure as Warden

In January 2012, Kelvin Williams began his first term as Bolivar County Sheriff. Doc. #77-9 at 5. His duties included, among others, overseeing the Bolivar County Regional Correctional Facility ("BCRCF"). Id. at 5-6. When he first took over as Bolivar County Sheriff in 2012, Williams hired James Moore to serve as the warden of BCRCF. Id. at 6.

In early 2013, Tangi Truelove, a former Director of the Female Alcohol and Drug Rehabilitation Program at BCRCF, sued Bolivar County for racial discrimination. Doc. #82-20 at ¶¶ 3, 5-6. Because James¹ was BCRCF's warden during the relevant time, he was deposed in Truelove's lawsuit. Doc. #82-14. As the Truelove trial date drew near, BCRCF sought to haveJames testify on its behalf at trial; however, BCRCF was unable to contact James to prepare for trial—even after Williams tried to contact him personally.² Doc. #77-9 at 20-21. Ultimately, the Truelove lawsuit settled around September 22, 2014, before it went to trial.³ Doc. #77-1 at ¶ 7.

B. Isadore's Hire at BCRCF

While he was warden, James informed his son Isadore that there were job openings in BCRCF's Alcohol and Drug Department. Doc. #77-2 at 17. After completing the application process, Isadore began working at BCRCF on March 5, 2012, as an alcohol and drug counselor. Id. at 9, 17-18, 91.

When Isadore began working at BCRCF, he received initial training from the Director of the Alcohol and Drug Department, Brenda Cook, and the Assistant Director of the Alcohol and Drug Department, Regina Fair. Id. at 20; Doc. #77-5 at 7-8. During this training, they reviewed the policies and procedures of the Mississippi Department of Mental Health and proper client file maintenance. Docs. #77-5 at 10, #77-7 at 12-13.

C. Cook's Sexual Advances

According to Isadore, within the first three months of his hire, Cook began to sexually harass him. Doc. #77-2 at 77. Specifically, Isadore claims that Cook asked him if he was married and if he was "seeing anybody," complimented him on how he looked, invited him to go have drinks with her, sent him a picture of herself to his personal e-mail account, told him that he "look[s] like the type of guy that knows his way around women," and wanted to find out "what kind of guy [he] was." Id. at 27, 77-78, 80, 82, 84. As a result, Isadore claims that he sufferedsignificant stress which required him to seek counseling and begin taking medication for hypertension. Id. at 72.

Isadore "disregarded" all of Cook's comments and contends that shortly after he declined her sexual overtures, Cook began criticizing his work, reprimanding him, writing him up, and requiring him to attend training sessions with her and Fair to improve the quality of his work. Id. at 85-86. Isadore was suspended without pay for three days in early 2014 for "consistently disregard[ing] instructions from [his] supervisors and fail[ing] to improve [his] work performance." Doc. #77-4 at 29-30.

D. Department of Health Audit and Isadore's Termination

On October 2, 2014, the Mississippi Department of Health conducted an audit of BCRCF's Alcohol and Drug Department.⁴ Doc. #82-8 at 31. On October 3, 2014, Williams terminated Isadore's employment at BCRCF because of "unsatisfactory work performance and incomplete client files." Doc. #77-6 at 1. BCRCF received the written report containing the findings of the October 2 audit on November 7, 2014.⁵ Doc. #77-9 at 17.

E. BCRCF's Sexual Harassment Policy

During the relevant time, BCRCF maintained a sexual harassment policy that directed employees subject to harassment to report offending activity to their "immediate manager." Doc. #77-3 at 1. Isadore never reported the alleged sexual harassment by Cook to Fair, his immediate manager, but discussed with Williams and Ora Starks, BCRCF's current warden,⁶ the "constanthassles" Cook and Fair were giving him. Doc. #77-2 at 24. Nor did Isadore use the term "sexual harassment" in his conversations with Williams and Starks. Id. at 29-30. He did, however, report the alleged sexual harassment to Cook's supervisor, Sylvester Hogan, who was the Director of Educational Programs at BCRCF. Doc. #77-8 at 6-7, 14. When Hogan requested that Isadore provide evidence of the sexual harassment, Isadore provided none, so Hogan did not pursue the allegation further. Id. at 15.

IIIProcedural History

In October 2015, Isadore filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi against Bolivar County, Mississippi, and "the individual Defendant Brenda Cook." Doc. #1 at 1. In his complaint, Isadore asserted a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, "the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and under 42 U.S.C. § 1981," and a single state law claim for "malicious interference with [his] employment." Id. at ¶ 3.

On February 24, 2016, Cook filed a motion to dismiss on privilege and immunity grounds under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act ("MTCA"). Doc. #14. On September 29, 2016, the Court denied her motion.⁷ Doc. #23.

On November 15, 2016, Isadore, with leave of the Court, filed an amended complaint against Bolivar County and Cook. Doc. #37. The amended complaint asserts "sex discrimination, sex harassment and retaliation" claims against Bolivar County and a claim for malicious interference with employment against Cook. Id. at 1. Cook and Bolivar County filed separate answers to the amended complaint. Docs. #39, #48.

On May 26, 2017, Bolivar County and Cook filed separate motions for summary judgment. Docs. #77, #79. Isadore responded in opposition to each motion and both Bolivar County and Cook replied. Docs. #82, #84, #85, #86.

On October 26, 2017, the Court held a telephonic status conference with the parties to discuss the need for additional briefing on an issue raised by the pending motions for summary judgment and the deadlines for such briefing. Doc. #116; see Doc. #118. The parties timely filed supplemental briefs on November 6, 2017. Docs. #121, #122.

IVAnalysis

A. Sexual Harassment Claims

In Casiano v. AT&T Corp., the Fifth Circuit provided a comprehensive guide for analyzing "all supervisor sexual harassment cases under Title VII."⁸ 213 F.3d 278, 283 (5th Cir. 2000). First, a court must "determine whether the complaining employee has or has not suffered a 'tangible employment action.'" Id. If the employee shows that he suffered a tangible employment action, the "suit is classified as a 'quid pro quo' case." Id. If, however, no tangible employment action is shown, the "suit is classified as a 'hostile work environment case.'" Id.

Here, Isadore pleads both quid pro quo and hostile work environment theories. The Court will address each theory in turn.

1. Quid pro quo sexual harassment

To establish liability under the quid pro quo theory, a plaintiff must show that he suffered a "tangible employment action" as a result of "his acceptance or rejection of his supervisor's alleged sexual harassment." Casiano, 213 F.3d at 283. "A tangible employment action constitutesa significant change in employment status, such as hiring, firing, ... or a decision causing a significant change in benefits." Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 761 (1998).

Isadore asserts that he suffered "multiple adverse employment actions" as a consequence of rejecting Cook's sexual advances, including Cook becoming hostile and...