Dediol v. Best Chevrolet, Inc.
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 18819
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Dediol, age 65 and a born-again Christian, worked at Best Chevrolet from June 1 to August 30, 2007 under Clay.
- On July 3, 2007, Dediol sought July 4 off for church volunteering; Melady granted it but Clay overruled in derogatory terms.
- Clay allegedly stopped referring to Dediol by name, using insults like 'old man' and 'old mother…' several times daily.
- Dediol alleged religion-based remarks by Clay, including statements about God and his job, totaling about a dozen incidents before departure.
- Clay allegedly provoked fights and displayed threats; Dediol requested a transfer to the New Car Department, which was preliminarily approved, but denied by Clay.
- August 29, 2007 meeting escalated; Clay threatened violence and charged toward Dediol; Dediol resigned on August 30, 2007.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ADEA hostile environment is cognizable under Title VII framework | Dediol argues age-based harassment was actionable under ADEA via Title VII framework. | Best Chevrolet argues no recognized ADEA hostile environment claim in this circuit. | Yes; age-based hostile environment claim is viable under the ADEA in this circuit. |
| Whether the age-harassment was objectively and subjectively offensive | Harassment was frequent and severe enough to be objectively hostile and subjectively offensive. | Record showed insufficient objective severity under summary judgment standards. | Issues of material fact on both objective and subjective offensiveness remained. |
| Whether religion-based harassment created a hostile work environment | Religious insults and coercive conduct formed a pattern of religious harassment. | Harassment did not clearly amount to a pervasive hostile environment. | Record creates genuine issue of material fact on religion-based hostility. |
| Whether constructive discharge was shown | Escalating tensions and forced resignation constitute constructive discharge. | No evidence that conditions would compel a reasonable employee to resign. | Genuine issue of material fact on whether Dediol was constructively discharged. |
| Whether summary judgment was appropriate given the record | Record shows pervasive harassment and threats; thus not entitled to summary judgment. | Record lacked clear proof of actionable harassment at summary judgment standard. | District court erred; summary judgment reversed and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Harvill v. Westward Comms., LLC, 433 F.3d 428 (5th Cir. 2005) (discusses objective/subjective standard for hostile environment)
- WC&M Enters., Inc. v. Holczer, 496 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 2007) (continuous pattern of less severe incidents can be actionable)
- Farpella-Crosby v. Horizon Health Care Corp., 97 F.3d 803 (5th Cir. 1996) (frequency of harassment supports objective offensiveness analysis)
- Scales v. Slater, 181 F.3d 703 (5th Cir. 1999) (stray remarks evidence undermines summary judgment in harassment cases)
- Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court 1998) (establishes baseline hostile environment framework)
- Rogers v. EEOC, 454 F.2d 234 (5th Cir. 1971) (title VII provides avenue to remedy hostile environment)
- Crawford v. Medina General Hosp., 96 F.3d 830 (6th Cir. 1996) (allows age-based hostile environment under title VII framework in this circuit)