773 F.Supp.3d 196
D. Md.2025Background
- Plaintiff Mohamed Magassouba, a Black man of African origin, was employed by the Prince George’s County Police Department (PGPD) from 2010 until his termination in 2021.
- Plaintiff alleges he faced discrimination and retaliation following a 2019 incident where he refused to alter a witness statement about a colleague's use of force, after which he claims he was subjected to unequal treatment and adverse employment actions.
- Plaintiff complained to supervisors, his union (FOP), and the department’s psychological services about perceived discrimination and hostile work conditions.
- An internal affairs investigation led to Plaintiff's suspension and eventual termination, purportedly for failing to disclose prior law enforcement encounters on his employment application.
- Plaintiff sued under Title VII, §1981, §1983, MFEPA, and other statutory and constitutional grounds, alleging various forms of discrimination, retaliation, hostile work environment, and deprivation of rights.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment after discovery, requesting dismissal of all claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Discrimination (race, nat’l origin, gender) | PGPD (esp. Porter) treated him worse than similarly situated non-Black officers | Actions were based on legitimate business reasons; no evidence of disparate treatment | Summary judgment for Defendants (insufficient comparator evidence/pretext) except for County as to suspension/termination |
| Retaliation | Adverse actions were retaliation for complaints and refusal to alter statement | No protected activity or knowledge thereof; actions were unrelated | Summary judgment for Defendants (no causal link to protected activity) |
| Hostile Work Environment | Subjected to pervasive, race-based harassment | Conduct not severe or pervasive enough; justified managerial actions | Some claims proceed (evidence sufficient for jury re: harassment by Porter, Walden, Waddy, County) |
| Retaliatory Hostile Work Environment | Persistent mistreatment after protected activity | No argument (not specifically addressed) | Defendants’ motion denied (issue to proceed to trial; not addressed in motion) |
| Equal Protection (§1983, Maryland Art. 24) | Disparate treatment from supervisors based on protected status | No evidence of different treatment of similarly situated non-protected officers | Summary judgment for Porter on discrimination, but claims re: hostile environment proceed; County claim proceeds |
| Conspiracy (§§ 1985 & 1986) | Defendants conspired/failed to prevent deprivation of civil rights | Not addressed in motion | Motion denied (not addressed; claims proceed) |
| Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies | Exhausted all necessary EEOC requirements | Plaintiff failed to use County’s internal grievance procedures | Plaintiff properly exhausted (EEOC process sufficient; no need to use County appeal board) |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (establishes burden-shifting framework for discrimination claims)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (standards for summary judgment)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (facts viewed in light most favorable to non-moving party at summary judgment)
- Holland v. Washington Homes, Inc., 487 F.3d 208 (4th Cir. 2007) (methods of proving discrimination claims)
- Foster v. Univ. of Md.-Eastern Shore, 787 F.3d 243 (4th Cir. 2015) (Title VII retaliation burden-shifting)
- Univ. of Tex. Southw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar, 570 U.S. 338 (2013) (but-for causation in retaliation claims)
- Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) (standard for hostile work environment)
- Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs. of City of N.Y., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability under §1983)
- Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) (hostile work environment under Title VII)
- Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006) (retaliatory hostile work environment standard)
- Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989) (official capacity claims are suits against the entity)