Brown v. District of Columbia
919 F. Supp. 2d 105
D.D.C.2013Background
- Brown, a long-time UDC/UDC-DCSL employee, sought tenure and promotion to full professor at DCSL in Jan 2009.
- FERC recommended tenure in May 2009; Dean Broderick initially resisted but later endorsed after a new publication was added.
- Provost Baxter denied tenure in June 2011 and referred the matter to President Sessoms, who ratified the denial in Oct 2011.
- Plaintiff was informed her employment would end at the close of the 2011-2012 academic year; the Board decided not to forward her tenure petition.
- Plaintiff filed suit May 2012 in D.C. Superior Court; later removed to federal court; District of Columbia was dismissed from the case with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sessoms' official-capacity claims are redundant | Brown sues Sessoms in official capacity; argues individual actions breached law. | Official-capacity claims are duplicative of the Board. | Official-capacity claims dismissed as redundant; treated as Board claims. |
| Whether a valid contract exists for breach of contract | Handbook and Merger Agreement bind the Board to tenure decisions. | No valid contract; Handbook is a reference, not a binding contract; Merger requires President final approval. | Breach of contract claim dismissed for lack of a valid binding contract. |
| Whether the implied covenant claim survives without a valid contract | Breach of implied covenant based on the same contract. | No contract, so no implied covenant duty. | Breach of good faith and fair dealing claim dismissed. |
| Whether the DCHRA claim states a prima facie discrimination claim | Denial of tenure due to race/gender; unequal treatment. | No plausible link between protected class and adverse action; no discrimination shown. | DCHRA claim dismissed for failure to allege facts showing discriminatory motive. |
| Whether §1981 claim survives based on race discrimination in contract | Denied tenure and promotion due to race; unequal treatment under contract. | Discrimination claim duplicative and not adequately pled. | §1981 claim dismissed for lack of factual support of race-based motive. |
Key Cases Cited
- Monell v. New York City Dep't of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (official-capacity and municipal liability analysis)
- Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159 (1985) (official-capacity suit treated as against the entity)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading standard for plausibility)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility standard for pleading)
- Kowal v. MCI Commc'ns Corp., 16 F.3d 1271 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (court may reject unsupported inferences)
- EEOC v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial Sch., 117 F.3d 621 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (judicial notice and incorporation of documents in complaint)
- Cambridge Holdings Grp., Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 357 F. Supp. 2d 89 (D.D.C. 2004) (contract formation requirements; essential terms)
- Chisholm v. Dist. of Columbia, 666 F. Supp. 2d 96 (D.D.C. 2009) (public policy exceptions to at-will termination)
- Park v. Hyatt Corp., 436 F. Supp. 2d 60 (D.D.C. 2006) (discrimination claims duplicative of other claims)