Barrett v. Salt Lake County
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11021
10th Cir.2014Background
- Michael Barrett, a long‑time Salt Lake County employee with positive reviews and promotions, helped a coworker pursue a sexual‑harassment complaint. Shortly thereafter he was investigated and demoted.
- The supervisor who initiated discipline was close to the alleged harasser and lost or destroyed records that purportedly justified Barrett’s demotion. Three co‑workers who offered to witness for the victim faced discipline.
- Barrett sued under Title VII for retaliation; a jury found for Barrett and awarded relief. The county appealed, challenging liability, jury instructions, equitable relief, and parts of the attorney‑fee award.
- The county sought judgment as a matter of law arguing Barrett failed to establish a McDonnell Douglas prima facie case; it also sought a new trial based on an allegedly erroneous mixed‑motive jury instruction.
- The district court restored Barrett’s pre‑demotion pay grade (without displacing the later hire) and awarded attorney fees, including fees for an optional internal “Career Service Council” grievance; the Tenth Circuit affirmed in part and vacated the award for fees tied to that optional grievance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of McDonnell Douglas at post‑trial JMOL | Barrett: evidence (timing, destroyed records, disciplining of witnesses) supports jury verdict; McDonnell Douglas not required post‑trial | County: Barrett failed to prove prima facie retaliation under McDonnell Douglas, entitling it to JMOL | McDonnell Douglas burden‑shifting does not govern post‑trial JMOL; review asks whether a reasonable jury could find retaliation. Substantial evidence supports the jury verdict. |
| Jury instructions — but‑for vs. mixed motives | Barrett: jury found but‑for causation on special verdict form | County: mixed‑motive instruction was given and Nassar requires but‑for causation—so new trial required | No new trial. Jury explicitly found but‑for causation and disclaimed reliance on mixed‑motive theory; any error was harmless. County forfeited later challenge to but‑for instruction. |
| Equitable relief (pay restoration without displacing innocent replacement) | Barrett: restoring pre‑demotion pay restores him as much as possible without harming innocent third party | County: award gives Barrett a windfall (more pay for less work) | Affirmed. District court acted within its broad equitable discretion; defendant bears risk of consequences of its unlawful conduct. |
| Attorney fees for optional internal grievance; appellate fees | Barrett: fees should be recoverable (points to §1988/Delaware Valley standard for useful/necessary work) | County: internal Career Service Council was optional; Manders bars fees for optional proceedings under Title VII §706(k) | Reverse in part. Fees for optional internal grievance are not awardable under Title VII (Manders controls). Barrett is nonetheless entitled to reasonable appellate fees for this appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (burden‑shifting framework for indirect evidence discrimination claims)
- Fallis v. Kerr‑McGee Corp., 944 F.2d 743 (10th Cir. 1991) (McDonnell Douglas does not apply to post‑trial JMOL review)
- U.S. Postal Serv. Bd. of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711 (1983) (standard for whether a reasonable jury could find discrimination)
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (2002) (limits McDonnell Douglas as a pleading requirement)
- Univ. of Tex. Sw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar, 133 S. Ct. 2517 (2013) (Title VII retaliation requires but‑for causation)
- Cortez v. Wal‑Mart Stores, Inc., 460 F.3d 1268 (10th Cir. 2006) (standard for overturning jury verdicts; must point one way)
- Manders v. Oklahoma ex rel. Dep’t of Mental Health, 875 F.2d 263 (10th Cir. 1989) (Title VII §706(k) does not authorize fees for optional internal grievance proceedings)
- Pennsylvania v. Del. Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546 (1986) (§1988 fee standards; useful and ordinarily necessary work)
- Ustrak v. Fairman, 851 F.2d 983 (7th Cir. 1988) (appellate fees may be awarded where appellee largely prevails)