Beaver v. Macomb County, 2:21-cv-10750

Background:

Plaintiff Anjanette Beaver, a Native American, worked as a Medical Examiner Investigator for Macomb County (July 2015–Mar. 21, 2021); Dr. Daniel Spitz and Spitz Pathology Group (Spitz/SPG) served under contract as the County’s Chief Forensic Pathologist and had delegated supervisory authority.
Beginning by 2016 and culminating in May 2020, several coworkers (“The Girls”) displayed pornographic and racially offensive images (including the “Barry meme”) and staged a sexually explicit “penis” birthday cake; Beaver complained in a July 10, 2020 letter and filed an EEOC charge July 14, 2020.
County investigation led to the suspension/termination of Roland, Hella, and Stout and Parrent’s resignation; Beaver alleges after complaining she was subjected to retaliation—primarily by Dr. Spitz—(extra scrutiny, counseling memo, overtime/leave adjustments, hostile conduct) and ultimately claimed constructive discharge in March 2021.
Beaver sued Macomb County, Spitz/SPG, and individual supervisors asserting: Title VII hostile work environment and retaliation; §1983 First Amendment retaliation and Monell claim; Michigan Whistleblower Protection Act; ELCRA hostile work environment and retaliation; and FFCRA (EPSLA) interference/retaliation. Parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
Court rulings on summary judgment: Title VII hostile environment (Count I) and Title VII retaliation (Count II) against Macomb County survive; §1983 First Amendment retaliation (Count III) against Spitz/SPG and individual county defendants survives; Monell (Count IV), Michigan WPA (Count V), and FFCRA (Count VIII) are dismissed; ELCRA hostile environment and retaliation claims (Counts VI & VII) survive against multiple defendants. Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment denied; several defendants’ motions denied in part and granted in part.

Issues:

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Title VII — sexual hostile work environment (Macomb County)	County is judicially estopped by arbitration findings and is vicariously liable for supervisor/co-worker harassment; plaintiff entitled to SJ as to liability.	County concedes hostile environment but disputes vicarious liability, argues prompt remediation and policy compliance.	Denied plaintiff’s SJ; claim proceeds to jury; factual dispute remains on employer liability and adequacy of County’s preventive policy.
Title VII — retaliation / retaliatory hostile environment (Macomb County)	Cumulative adverse acts after July 2020 (criticism, counseling memo, overtime denials, pay/leave adjustments, hostile conduct) would dissuade reasonable worker; causal link to protected complaints.	County contends discrete acts are de minimis and not materially adverse; no causation.	County SJ denied; juryable dispute: cumulative acts could be materially adverse and causally connected to protected activity.
§1983 First Amendment retaliation (Spitz/SPG + individual county defendants)	Plaintiff’s speech on discrimination, MIOSHA safety, and public-health concerns is protected; cumulative adverse conduct would chill an ordinary person.	Spitz/SPG contends actions are not materially adverse for First Amendment purposes (de minimis).	Spitz/SPG’s SJ denied; triable factual dispute whether actions would chill a person of ordinary firmness; individual county defendants’ arguments deemed waived or similarly rejected.
Monell claim (Macomb County)	County had custom/practice delegating control to Spitz/SPG and tolerated retaliation — inadequate training/supervision and acquiescence.	County argues no municipal policy/custom, isolated incidents insufficient, and no deliberate indifference.	Granted in favor of County; plaintiff failed to show a pervasive, longstanding custom or deliberate-indifference pattern sufficient for Monell liability.
Michigan Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA)	Filing MIOSHA complaint about PPE and COVID safety was protected activity; adverse actions (constructive discharge etc.) caused by that complaint.	Defendants: no materially adverse employment action tied to MIOSHA complaint; WPA requires more than inconvenience.	Granted for defendants; plaintiff failed to show a materially adverse action under the WPA (constructive discharge unsupported).
ELCRA — hostile work environment & retaliation (all defendants, and individual liability)	Same facts as Title VII; ELCRA permits individual liability for agents with delegated supervisory authority (e.g., Spitz, Roland).	Some defendants argue lack of employer/agent status and that conduct was not severe/pervasive.	SJ denied for defendants on ELCRA hostile-environment and retaliation claims; factual disputes on severity/pervasiveness and agency (supervisory authority) remain for jury.
FFCRA/EPSLA retaliation (Macomb County)	Deductions to leave bank and adjustments to COVID-related pay were retaliatory after plaintiff asserted FFCRA/EPSLA rights.	County proffers legitimate nondiscriminatory payroll/leave accounting reasons and corrective audits.	Granted for County; plaintiff failed to show pretext — County’s payroll/leave adjustments were nondiscriminatory and supported by records.

Key Cases Cited

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard)
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) (summary judgment and inferences)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (nonmoving party’s evidentiary burden)
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (burden-shifting framework for discrimination/retaliation)
Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) (hostile-work-environment standard)
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) (employer affirmative defense for supervisor harassment)
Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998) (employer liability for supervisor harassment and Faragher/Ellerth defense)
Vance v. Ball State Univ., 570 U.S. 421 (2013) (definition of supervisor for vicarious liability)
Thaddeus-X v. Blatter, 175 F.3d 378 (6th Cir. 1999) (First Amendment retaliation adverse-action standard)
Wyatt v. Nissan N. Am., Inc., 999 F.3d 400 (6th Cir. 2021) (hostile-work-environment elements and employer liability)
Gallagher v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., 567 F.3d 263 (6th Cir. 2009) (co-worker notice and employer remediation standard)
Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires policy, custom, or deliberate indifference)
City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989) (failure-to-train standard for municipal liability)
Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011) (high bar for municipal failure-to-train liability)
Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004) (constructive discharge standard)