Kemit Mawakana v. Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia
926 F.3d 859
| D.C. Cir. | 2019Background
- Kemit Mawakana, a Black law professor at the University of the District of Columbia (hired 2006; promoted 2010), applied for tenure in 2011 and was denied in 2013 after multi-level review (subcommittee, full faculty, dean, provost, president).
- Mawakana alleges he received little or no notice of substantive concerns during the 2011–2012 academic year and that he was told to withdraw in late 2012; he was informed of denial on May 1, 2013 and employment ended August 15, 2013.
- He sued in 2014 asserting race-discrimination (Title VII and DCHRA), 42 U.S.C. § 1981/§ 1983 claims, breach of contract, and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; case was removed to federal court.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the University on the discrimination and contract claims; Mawakana appealed the discrimination and contract holdings (he did not appeal the §1981/§1983 rulings).
- The D.C. Circuit held that (1) academic deference does not shield universities from Title VII review and that a reasonable jury could find race was a motivating factor in the tenure denial based on multiple pieces of circumstantial evidence, and (2) Mawakana’s contract-based claims (to the extent they rest on failure to meet with him in 2011–2012) were timely and present triable factual disputes about breach and causation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether academic-deference bars Title VII review of tenure denial | Ewing-like deference should not block Title VII inquiry; decision motivated by race | University argued courts should defer to academic judgments and that decision was academic, not discriminatory | Court: No special deference; Title VII applies and courts must determine if denial was for discriminatory reasons |
| Whether evidence could permit a reasonable jury to find race was a motivating factor in tenure denial | Mawakana pointed to discriminatory treatment of scholarship criteria, Dean Broderick’s negative role and pattern of disfavoring Black candidates | University said denial rested on legitimate nondiscriminatory reason (deficient scholarship) | Court: Reversed summary judgment —circumstantial evidence (criteria inconsistency, dean’s conduct, statistical/pattern evidence, witness beliefs) could permit a jury to find race was a motivating factor |
| Whether contract claims (failure to provide annual review/notice) were time-barred | Breach occurred when University failed to meet with him in 2011–2012; suit filed within 3 years | University argued breach accrued earlier or claims did not cause harm | Court: Claims alleging breach in 2011–2012 are timely because accrual would be mid-2012; remanded to resolve factual disputes |
| Whether University’s alleged contractual breach could not have caused harm (no causation) | If timely notice/meeting occurred, Mawakana could have updated application and avoided denial | University argued filing before 2011–12 meant no causal link | Court: Fact questions remain whether a meeting/notice would have allowed updating and whether breach caused denial; summary judgment on contract claims premature |
Key Cases Cited
- Regents of the Univ. of Mich. v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (recognizes judicial deference to good-faith academic decisions)
- Univ. of Pa. v. EEOC, 493 U.S. 182 (Title VII applies to tenure decisions; academic freedom does not excuse discrimination)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (framework for burden-shifting in discrimination cases)
- Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90 (plaintiff may show discriminatory motive by circumstantial evidence; motivating-factor standard)
- Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 562 U.S. 411 (supervisor’s discriminatory act that proximately causes adverse action can impose employer liability)
- Brown v. Sessoms, 774 F.3d 1016 (related D.C. Circuit tenure-discrimination context; previously reversed dismissal)