Case Law Seale v. Madison Cnty.

Seale v. Madison Cnty.

Document Cited Authorities (61) Cited in (4) Related

APPEARANCES:

O'HARA, O'CONNELL & CIOTOLI

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

7207 East Genesee Street

Fayetteville, NY 13066

THE LAW FIRM OF FRANK W. MILLER

Attorneys for Defendants

6575 Kirkville Road

East Syracuse, NY 13057

OF COUNSEL:

STEPHEN CIOTOLI, ESQ.

CHARLES C. SPAGNOLI, ESQ.

FRANK W. MILLER, ESQ.

BRYAN N. GEORGIADY, ESQ.

GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge

DECISION and ORDER

Currently before the Court, in this employment discrimination action filed by Kelly Seale and David Seale ("Plaintiffs") against the above-captioned government entity and four named individuals ("Defendants"), is Defendants' motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. (Dkt. No. 34.) For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted.

I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND
A. Procedural History

Because this Decision and Order is intended primarily for the review of the parties, the Court will not recite this action's procedural history, including Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings, which was granted in part and denied in part. See Seale v. Madison Cnty., 929 F. Supp. 2d 51 (N.D.N.Y. 2013).

B. Plaintiffs' Claims

The following claims survived Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings: (1) a hostile work environment claim by Plaintiff Kelly Seale ("Kelly Seale") against Defendant, Madison County ("the County") pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII") and the New York Human Rights Law, N.Y. EXEC. LAW § 296 ("NYHRL"); (2) a hostile work environment claim by Kelly Seale against Defendant, Matthew Episcopo ("Episcopo") pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Section 1983"); (3) a retaliation claim by Kelly Seale against the County pursuant to Title VII; (4) a retaliation claim by Kelly Seale against the County as well as Defendants, Episcopo, Allen Riley ("Riley") and Ryan Aylward ("Aylward") pursuant to NYHRL; (5) a First Amendment retaliation claim by Kelly Seale against the County, Riley, Episcopo and Aylward; and (6) a First Amendment retaliation claim by Plaintiff, David Seale ("David Seale") against the County, Riley, Episcopo, Aylward and Defendant, Doug Baily ("Bailey").

C. Undisputed Material Facts1

Unless otherwise followed by citations to the record, the following material facts have been asserted and supported by Defendants in their Local Rule 7.1 Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, and either admitted or denied without a supporting record citation by Plaintiffs in their Local Rule 7.1 Response (compare Dkt. No. 34-1 [Defs.' Rule 7.1 Statement] with Dkt. No. 38 [Pls.' Rule 7.1 Response]), or have been asserted and supported by Plaintiffs in their Local Rule 7.1 Statement of Additional Undisputed Material Facts, to which Defendants have failed to respond (see Dkt. No. 38 at 70-77 [Pls.' Rule 7.1 Statement]).

Kelly Seale is a former employee of the County. She was employed as the Community Services Aide at the County Sheriff's Office from January 2, 2008 until she resigned effective May 31, 2010. Kelly Seale was a part-time employee and was not entitled to vacation time, sick leave or other compensated leave. Kelly Seale's husband, David Seale, is currently employed by the County in the Sheriff's Office. David Seale began his employment as a Deputy in the Sheriff's Office in 1998. According to Sheriff Riley, David Seale was promoted to Sergeant effective August 9, 2014. (See Dkt. No. 41-2 at ¶ 4 [Reply Aff. of Allen Riley, Aug. 22, 2014].)

Defendant Riley is the current Sheriff of the County. He was elected to that position in November 2009 and assumed office in January 2010. Defendant Bailey was employed as Undersheriff of the County from 1991 until he retired on December 1, 2010. From September 2009, when former Sheriff Ronald Cary ("Cary") resigned, until Sheriff Riley took office, Bailey performed the duties of Sheriff on an interim basis.

Defendant Aylward is currently employed as the Director of Labor Relations in the County's Personnel and Civil Service Department. He has held that position since Spring, 2010. Prior to Spring, 2010, he was employed as the County's Coordinator of Labor Relations.

Defendant Episcopo was formerly a Captain in the Sheriff's Office. He held that position from 2005 until he retired in May, 2011. According to Sheriff Riley and Undersheriff Bailey, Episcopo did not have the ability to hire, fire, promote, demote, make any decision substantially changing the salary or benefits of, or make any decision substantially reassigning the duties of any other employee of the Sheriff's Office, including Kelly Seale. (Dkt. No. 34-3 at ¶ 4 [Riley Aff., June 25, 2014]; Dkt. No. 34-5 at ¶ 2 [Bailey Aff., July 1, 2014].) Kelly Seale testified that she did not have any information, nor was she told, that Episcopo could have hired, fired, promoted, denied a promotion to, or reassigned her. (Dkt. No. 34-19 at 82:21-84:7 [Kelly Seale Dep., Oct. 30, 2013].) Plaintiff David Seale testified that Episcopo was involved in the firing of several corrections officers and deputy sheriffs throughout the years, meaning that Episcopo made recommendations to the Sheriff and Undersheriff, who usually followed his recommendations, although the Sheriff had the ultimate authority to make that decision. (Dkt. No. 37-3 at 130:11- 131:8 [David Seale Dep., Oct. 31, 2013].) Bailey testified that during his twenty years as Undersheriff, he never saw a recommendation for termination or suspension, butsaw recommendations for additional training. (Dkt. No. 37-6 at 15:1-24 [Bailey Dep., Apr. 9, 2014].)

At all relevant times, the County had in place a policy proscribing sexual harassment in the workplace and providing a procedure by which employees may report alleged sexual harassment. (Dkt. No. 34-32 [Ex. S to Spagnoli Aff., July 1, 2014]; Dkt. No. 34-33 [Ex. T to Spagnoli Aff.].) The County provided regular training and instruction on its sexual harassment policy to its employees, including Episcopo and Kelly Seale. (Dkt. No. 34-21 [Episcopo Dep., Apr. 7, 2014, 36:20-37:4 that he attended annual training]; Dkt. No. 34-18 [Kelly Seale 50-h Dep., June 24, 2010, 58:7-60:9 that she attended training and was told how to file a complaint].)

Kelly Seale claims that she "was subjected to repeated instances of sexual harassment, intimidation, humiliation, and discrimination by Defendant Episcopo" from "shortly after the beginning of her employment in January 2008 until January 2010." (Dkt. No. 1 at ¶ 27 [Compl.].) However, it is undisputed that prior to November 5, 2009, Kelly Seale did not state or report to any employee of the County, including her husband, that she was being sexually harassed by Episcopo.2

From January 2, 2008 until November 5, 2009, Kelly Seale worked in an alcove outside the office of Episcopo in the County's Public Safety Building ("PSB").

On May 19, 2008, Episcopo placed a radio on a cabinet outside of his office and turned it on with the volume set at a high level. He told Kelly Seale it was to ensure that she could not hear conversations inside his office. He asked her if that was ok, and she did not object.Subsequently, Kelly Seale complained to then Sheriff Cary, after which Episcopo removed the radio, stating to Kelly Seale, "your radio privileges have been revoked."3

In September 2008, after David Seale was taken out of work again by his doctor, Episcopo failed to timely turn in Kelly Seale's time sheet record. As a result, Kelly Seale did not receive her paycheck on schedule. According to Kelly Seale, the prior general practice had been that she filled out her time sheets and put them in Episcopo's mail slot, after which he would sign them and pass them on to payroll. (Dkt No. 37-8 [Ex. 8-F to Ciotoli Aff.].)

On October 20, 2008, Episcopo was in his office with his door shut speaking to a deputy, who had apparently returned to work while still using crutches after having been out on worker's compensation. In a loud tone of voice that Kelly Seale could hear, Episcopo stated, "This department is made up of a bunch of fucking cry-babies that can't do their jobs . . . [this deputy] came back early on crutches and others are still milking comp and crying that their arms hurt. If I had my way, a lot of people wouldn't have their fucking jobs and we all know who I am talking about." At that time, David Seale was out on worker's compensation for a shoulder injury. (Dkt No. 37-8 [Ex. 8-G to Ciotoli Aff.].)

On December 10, 2008, Kelly Seale discovered a pornographic snowman cartoon, lying face down on her desktop keyboard. The cartoon depicted three snowmen masturbating while they stare at a large breasted snow woman. Kelly Seale was sick and upset and went home early because she thought someone was making fun of her. She thought Episcopo left the cartoonbecause she always catches him staring at her breasts when he's around her. Kelly Seale was afraid to tell anyone about the cartoon because she thought no one would believe her word over Episcopo's. (Dkt No. 37-8 [Ex. 8-H to Ciotoli Aff.].) David Seale testified that at some point between 2001 and 2005, the snowman cartoon was posted on a bulletin board when he worked in investigations. It was the same cartoon that Episcopo had previously sent to David Seale and others in an email, but David Seale agreed that he does not have any information that Episcopo is the one who posted the cartoon on the bulletin board. (Dkt. No....

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex