Magloire Etoh v. Fannie Mae
404 U.S. App. D.C. 291
| D.C. Cir. | 2013Background
- Ayissi-Etoh, African-American, worked as Senior Financial Modeler at Fannie Mae; he was promoted to Modeling Team Lead but did not receive a salary increase while peers did.
- A white coworker, Ku- cerkova, received a raise despite not obtaining a Team Lead position.
- Ayissi-Etoh alleges his supervisor Pesut criticized him and he faced alleged racial bias after promotion.
- A white Vice President, Cooper, allegedly yelled a racial slur at Ayissi-Etoh; he reported the incident and filed EEOC complaints.
- Fannie Mae conducted an external investigation; Cooper was fired after findings of a racial slur; Ayissi-Etoh later filed suit in district court.
- The District Court granted summary judgment on all counts; the court of appeals reversed for three federal claims and affirmed the defamation claim under D.C. law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ayissi-Etoh can prove race discrimination under § 1981 | Ayissi-Etoh cites direct evidence of discriminatory intent (Wagner’s comment). | Fannie Mae contends no direct evidence; summary judgment appropriate. | Jurisdiction reversal; direct-evidence framework creates trial-worthy issue. |
| Whether Ayissi-Etoh state a hostile work environment under § 1981 | Cooper’s epithet and Wagner’s remarks, plus continued interaction, create abuse. | Employer could rely on Faragher/Ellerth defense; timely remedy negates liability. | Jurisdiction reversal; evidence could support a hostile environment. |
| Whether Ayissi-Etoh's firing was retaliation for EEOC activity under § 1981 | Direct evidence of being fired for dropping EEOC claims. | No conclusive credibility finding at summary judgment; defense of action. | Jurisdiction reversal; retaliation claim could prevail at trial. |
| Whether Ayissi-Etoh can pursue a DC defamation claim against Pesut | Pesut’s statements accusing plagiarism constitute defamation. | Statements truthful; not defamatory. | Affirmed summary judgment for defamation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (U.S. 2002) (plaintiff may rely on direct evidence; credibility questions survive summary judgment when facts disputed)
- Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (U.S. 1998) (supervisor harassment creates vicarious liability with narrow affirmative defense)
- Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (U.S. 1998) (employer liability for supervisor harassment; defense if remedy prompt and employee reasonably utilized system)
- Rodgers v. Western-Southern Life Insurance Co., 12 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 1993) (unambiguous racial epithet can alter employment conditions)
- Spriggs v. Diamond Auto Glass, 242 F.3d 179 (4th Cir. 2001) (epithets may suffice to establish severe harassment if severe enough)
- Turnbull v. Topeka State Hospital, 255 F.3d 1238 (10th Cir. 2001) (single incident can support harassment if severe and threatening)
- Reedy v. Quebecor Printing Eagle, Inc., 333 F.3d 906 (8th Cir. 2003) (single verbal incident can be severe enough to support hostile environment)