Kathy Snyder v. John D. Rutherford, Executive Director, Metro Emergency
16-0488
| W. Va. | Apr 7, 2017Background
- Kathy Snyder worked for Metro Emergency Operations Center (Metro) from 1993 until resigning in May 2014; she claimed constructive discharge after demotion and a 72-cent hourly pay reduction.
- John D. Rutherford, Metro’s executive director and county sheriff, informed Snyder of the personnel action about a week before she resigned and told her to file a grievance if she disagreed.
- Snyder sued in May 2015 in Kanawha County Circuit Court alleging constructive discharge from a hostile work environment and that Rutherford exceeded his authority by serving as Metro’s executive director in light of W. Va. Code § 7-7-4(8).
- Respondents moved to dismiss (or for summary judgment), arguing Snyder failed to allege discrimination based on a protected class, was collaterally estopped from relitigating Rutherford’s authority, and failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
- The circuit court granted the motion to dismiss, finding Snyder did not allege membership in a protected class and was barred from relitigating Rutherford’s authority; it did not decide the exhaustion argument.
- Snyder appealed; the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the complaint failed to state a claim of constructive discharge based on unlawful discrimination and therefore dismissal was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal was proper for failure to state a claim | Snyder: complaint pleaded facts supporting constructive discharge from a hostile work environment | Respondents: complaint alleges no unlawful discriminatory basis; therefore no constructive-discharge claim | Held: dismissal proper — complaint did not allege discrimination based on protected class, so no cognizable constructive-discharge claim |
| Whether Snyder was required to exhaust administrative remedies | Snyder: not required to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit | Respondents: Snyder failed to exhaust administrative remedies | Held: Court did not rely on exhaustion; Snyder’s argument on exhaustion rejected as meritless because court did not base decision on it |
| Whether Rutherford exceeded his statutory authority by acting as Metro’s executive director | Snyder: Rutherford violated W. Va. Code § 7-7-4(8) and that supports her claims | Respondents: collateral estoppel/previous decision bars relitigation of Rutherford’s authority | Held: Court declined to reach this issue on appeal because Snyder’s complaint alleged only constructive discharge, so resolving Rutherford’s authority would not affect the outcome |
| Application of res judicata / collateral estoppel to Rutherford’s role | Snyder: circuit court wrongly applied res judicata to bar inquiry into Rutherford’s authority | Respondents: prior litigation precludes relitigation | Held: Court affirmed circuit court’s reliance on preclusive effect for that argument in lower court, but treated the issue as not outcome-determinative and did not reverse on it |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. McGraw v. Scott Runyan Pontiac–Buick, Inc., 194 W. Va. 770, 461 S.E.2d 516 (W. Va. 1995) (standard of review for motions to dismiss)
- Murphy v. Smallridge, 196 W. Va. 35, 468 S.E.2d 167 (W. Va. 1996) (motion to dismiss granted only where no relief could be granted under any provable facts)
- Slack v. Kanawha Co. Housing & Redevelopment Auth., 188 W. Va. 144, 423 S.E.2d 547 (W. Va. 1992) (constructive discharge requires an intolerable hostile work environment based on unlawful discrimination)
- Forshey v. Jackson, 222 W. Va. 743, 671 S.E.2d 748 (W. Va. 2008) (discussing motion-to-dismiss standards)
- Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69 (U.S. 1984) (pleading standard cited in motion-to-dismiss analysis)