Dunlap v. TM Trucking of the Carolinas, LLC
288 F. Supp. 3d 654
D.S.C.2017Background
- Five African-American drivers (Dunlap, Good, Elam, Neal, Thompson) sued several related trucking companies and owner Tony McMillan under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, alleging a racially hostile work environment and that four of them were constructively discharged.
- Plaintiffs allege McMillan, the sole owner and decisionmaker, frequently used the racial slur "nigger" in the workplace, sometimes directed at plaintiffs, and created a pervasive racially hostile atmosphere.
- McMillan admitted using the word at work but denied directing it at African-American employees or understanding it to be offensive; he claimed others used the term too. Plaintiffs disputed that others used it.
- The Magistrate Judge recommended denying summary judgment on hostile work environment claims but granting summary judgment on constructive discharge for all plaintiffs.
- District court reviewed objections: it denied summary judgment on the hostile work environment claim; granted summary judgment for constructive discharge as to Elam but denied summary judgment as to Dunlap, Good, and Neal.
- Court held defendants (including TNT Propane) were not entitled to summary judgment on employer-status grounds because defendants failed to move under single-/joint-employer tests and plaintiff evidence supported imputation of owner conduct to the corporations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hostile work environment under § 1981 | McMillan's frequent use of the slur created an objectively and subjectively abusive, race-based workplace | Plaintiffs lack specificity on dates/times; isolated or nonactionable conduct; no adverse employment acts | Denied summary judgment for defendants; factual dispute for jury — slur by owner was sufficiently severe/pervasive and imputable to employer |
| Constructive discharge (Dunlap, Good, Neal) | Resignations were reasonable foreseeable responses to intolerable, race-based conditions; owner acted with deliberate indifference or intent | Harassment did not show intent to force resignation; plaintiffs tolerated conduct; lack of escalating targeted harassment | Denied summary judgment for these three; jury must decide deliberateness and intolerability |
| Constructive discharge (Elam) | (Elam) claimed harassment but resigned for pay reasons | Defendants point to Elam's testimony that money motivated his resignation | Granted summary judgment for defendants as to Elam (no constructive discharge) |
| Employer status of TNT Propane, Inc. | Plaintiffs argued the entities operated as an integrated/joint employer under common ownership and control | Defendants argued plaintiffs were not employed by TNT Propane and sought dismissal on that basis | Overruled defendants' objection; court found defendants failed to timely/legal move on employer-status tests; factual issues remain for trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) (defines hostile work environment standard and objective/subjective components)
- Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998) (objective reasonable-person standard in harassment claims)
- Spriggs v. Diamond Auto Glass, 242 F.3d 179 (4th Cir. 2001) (use of racial epithets by supervisor can be sufficient to establish hostile environment)
- Guessous v. Fairview Prop. Invs., LLC, 828 F.3d 208 (4th Cir. 2016) (§ 1981 and Title VII hostile environment elements are the same)
- Amirmokri v. Balt. Gas & Elec. Co., 60 F.3d 1126 (4th Cir. 1995) (frequent name-calling and ethnic slurs can establish severe or pervasive harassment)
- Butler v. Drive Auto. Indus. of Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 404 (4th Cir. 2015) (factors for joint-employer analysis)