Morley v. Energy Services of America Corp.
3:22-cv-00375
S.D.W. VaJan 3, 2024Background
- Plaintiff MacKenzie Morley was hired by C.J. Hughes Construction Co. in 2020 as Marketing Director, reporting to the company president; C.J. Hughes is owned by Energy Services of America Corp. (ESA).
- Morley alleged gender-based hostile work environment and retaliation under the West Virginia Human Rights Act (WVHRA) after she reported inappropriate comments by President Charles Austin and a pay disparity with a male subordinate.
- Morley participated in an investigation into another executive (Riddle) for sexual harassment; soon after, she was reassigned to report to a lower-level manager, which she characterized as a demotion, though her pay and title remained unchanged.
- Morley was later terminated for allegedly failing to disclose substantial outside payments received while working on a workforce development program with Mountwest Community College during work hours, with factual disputes over whether the company had prior knowledge or authorized her compensation.
- Morley brought claims for (I) hostile work environment, (II) retaliation (for protected activity and for filing this lawsuit), and (III) common law wrongful termination; the court considered cross-motions for summary judgment by both sides.
- The court had previously dismissed claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress; Count IV (tortious interference) was also dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ESA/Reynolds liability under WVHRA | ESA controls C.J. Hughes' employment; Reynolds aided/abetted | ESA not employer; Reynolds not liable as individual | Sufficient issue of fact to present to jury |
| Hostile work environment (Count I) | Austin’s sexist comments created hostile environment | Prompt corrective action was taken; no ongoing environment | Dismissed (summary judgment for defendants) |
| Retaliation (Count II): reassingment as adverse action | Reassignment was demotion linked to protected activity | No adverse action; reassignment for neutral business reasons | Genuine dispute; jury must decide |
| Retaliation (Count II): termination as pretext | Firing was pretextual for retaliation for protected activity | Legitimate reason (undisclosed outside payment) | Genuine dispute; jury must decide |
| Common law wrongful discharge (Count III) | Terminated in violation of WVHRA policy and for testimony | No employer-employee relationship for ESA/Reynolds (veil) | Dismissed (summary judgment for defendants) |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. Flowers Indus., Inc., 814 F.2d 978 (4th Cir. 1987) (sets standard for parent company liability as employer)
- Hanlon v. Chambers, 464 S.E.2d 741 (W. Va. 1995) (elements of hostile work environment and retaliation under WVHRA)
- Barefoot v. Sundale Nursing Home, 457 S.E.2d 152 (W. Va. 1995) (burden-shifting and pretext analysis on discrimination claims)
- Harless v. First Nat’l Bank in Fairmont, 246 S.E.2d 270 (W. Va. 1978) (elements of wrongful discharge in violation of public policy)
- Page v. Columbia Nat’l Res., 480 S.E.2d 817 (W. Va. 1996) (public policy against retaliation for truthful testimony)
- Williamson v. Greene, 490 S.E.2d 23 (W. Va. 1997) (Harless claims and employers not subject to the WVHRA)