802 F. Supp. 2d 670
E.D. Va.2011Background
- Edwards, a Murphy-Brown employee, alleges years of sexually offensive conduct by male Mexican migrant workers and reporting to supervisor Flournoy under Epps, with no discipline taken.
- A 2008 incident found a male worker in the women's shower area and drilled peepholes; door was patched but no investigation into harassing conduct occurred.
- Plaintiff and a coworker reported to HR; Epps refused to protect them and suggested they could quit; Plaintiff was reassigned to Farm 6 as a response to complaints.
- Plaintiff claims the reassignment and management’s actions were designed to deter complaints and further harass, leading to a Title VII retaliation claim.
- Plaintiff amended Count II on January 20, 2011; the court previously denied dismissal of Count II but allowed amendment; the court later held the amended complaint timely and that a prima facie retaliation claim could proceed.
- Defendant moved to dismiss Count II under Rule 12(b)(6); the court denied the motion, allowing the retaliation claim to proceed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of the amended complaint | Amendment timely under ECF rules | Amendment untimely under re-started clock | Timely under ECF filing rule |
| Prima facie retaliation elements satisfied | Reassignment and response to complaints were materially adverse | Reassignment was a lateral move, not materially adverse | Amended complaint plausibly states a prima facie retaliation claim under Title VII |
Key Cases Cited
- Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (U.S. 2006) (adverse action standard for retaliation claims is broader than discrimination)
- Ziskie v. Mineta, 547 F.3d 220 (4th Cir. 2008) (prima facie retaliation elements test in Fourth Circuit)
- Holland v. Wash. Homes, Inc., 487 F.3d 208 (4th Cir. 2007) (prima facie retaliation framework in Fourth Circuit)
- Darveau v. Detecon, Inc., 515 F.3d 334 (4th Cir. 2008) (adverse action may arise from retaliatory conduct outside terms/conditions of employment)
- Lettieri v. Equant Inc., 478 F.3d 640 (4th Cir. 2007) (retaliation scope broadened beyond employment terms under Burlington Northern)
- Jordan v. Alternative Res. Corp., 458 F.3d 332 (4th Cir. 2006) (objective reasonable belief of violation can support protected activity)