Howze v. Jefferson County Committee for Economic Opportunity
2:11-cv-00052
N.D. Ala.Aug 28, 2012Background
- Howze, a former JCCEO employee, sues the Jefferson County Committee for Economic Opportunity and connected individuals for discrimination and torts.
- Plaintiff alleges disability and age discrimination under ADAAA, §504 of the Rehabilitation Act, ADEA, and AADEA (Count I–II) and state tort claims for IIED/outrage (Count III, V) and negligent hiring/training/retention (Count IV).
- Howze was HPRP Coordinator under Debro, who supervised her and later terminated her in April 2010 after Jefferson County announced funding withdrawal.
- JCCEO administers grant-funded programs; HPRP funding comes from HUD and state/county/city grants with strict reporting requirements.
- Debro made comments about “young blood” and moving older employees, and Howze claims a nexus between her hearing disability and retaliation, culminating in her termination after a funding withdrawal was announced.
- The court granted some claims and denied others; key issues include ADAAA discrimination, ADEA/AADEA discrimination, and Alabama tort claims of outrage and negligent supervision/retention.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADAAA discrimination against JCCEO | Howze to prove disability and that termination was linked to her hearing loss. | Howze cannot show a causal link between disability and firing. | Granted in favor of JCCEO; no prima facie causal nexus shown. |
| ADEA/AADEA discrimination against JCCEO | Howze was replaced by younger coworkers; age was a factor. | There is a prima facie case and pretext questions remaining. | Denied for summary judgment; triable issues on pretext exist. |
| Outrage/IIED by individual defendants | Terminating for discriminatory reasons constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct. | Conduct not extreme or outrageous under Alabama law. | Granted; dismisses Count III and V against individuals. |
| Negligent hiring/training/retention by JCCEO | Employer failed to prevent discriminatory acts or properly supervise Debro. | No affirmative knowledge or causal link established; claims fail. | Granted; Count IV dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Potts v. Hayes, 771 So. 2d 462 (Ala. 2000) (outrage limited to egregious conduct; high bar for distress claims)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (U.S. 1973) (burden-shifting framework for discrimination claims)
- Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (U.S. 1981) (part of McDonnell Douglas framework (pretext))
- Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., 557 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2009) (but-for causation standard in age discrimination claims)
- Mora v. Jackson Mem'l Found., Inc., 597 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. 2010) (prima facie age discrimination framework; pretext analysis)
- Carter v. City of Miami, 122 F.3d 997 (11th Cir. 1997) (age difference as legally significant for ADEA)
- Verbraeken v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 881 F.2d 1041 (11th Cir. 1989) (pretext framework in discrimination cases)