Rowe v. Schulte Hospitality Group LLC, 5:23-cv-00326

Background:

Plaintiff (Black woman) worked for Schulte Hospitality Group as Guest Services Representative from May 24, 2021 to Aug 31, 2022 and proceeded pro se.
On July 16, 2021 a white co-worker called Plaintiff the n‑word; Plaintiff filed a grievance alleging racial slur and sexual comments toward Black male employees.
On Aug 22, 2021 Plaintiff received a write‑up she contends was the co‑worker’s error; she filed another grievance in Sept. 2021.
On Nov 11, 2021 Plaintiff filed a grievance alleging systemic racism and alleges the next day the manager removed her from the weekend schedule through January 2022 (60+ days).
Plaintiff filed an EEOC charge on Mar 23, 2022 and alleges she was briefly taken off the schedule Mar 27, 2022 (returned Apr 3, 2022).
Plaintiff was terminated on Aug 31, 2022 during EEOC mediation. Defendant moved to dismiss; court granted in part and denied in part.

Issues:

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Hostile work environment based on coworker’s use of the n‑word	Single use of n‑word and related conduct created a racially hostile workplace	One isolated slur by a co‑worker (not supervisor) and vague allegations are insufficient	Dismissed — single coworker slur + vague conduct not plausibly severe or pervasive
Discrimination based on Aug 22, 2021 write‑up	Write‑up was wrongful and discriminatory	A write‑up is not an adverse employment action here; no material harm alleged	Dismissed — write‑up did not plausibly constitute adverse action
Retaliation for Nov 11, 2021 grievance (schedule removal Nov–Jan)	Removal from weekend schedule was retaliatory for grievance alleging systemic racism	Plaintiff lacked objectively reasonable belief that Title VII was violated; underlying discrimination claim fails	Dismissed — plaintiff failed to show objectively reasonable belief or material adversity
Retaliation for EEOC charge (schedule change Mar 27–Apr 3, 2022)	Brief removal from schedule was retaliatory after EEOC charge received	One‑week schedule change is not materially adverse; belief not objectively reasonable	Dismissed — not materially adverse and belief not objectively reasonable
Retaliation for participating in EEOC mediation (termination Aug 31, 2022)	Termination occurred during EEOC mediation and was retaliatory	Defendant argued lack of causal connection or temporal proximity	Survived dismissal — termination during mediation is protected activity and temporally proximate; plausible retaliation claim remains

Key Cases Cited

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading requires factual plausibility)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (conclusory allegations insufficient)
Lounds v. Lincare, 812 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir. 2015) (n‑word incidents considered in hostile‑work‑environment analysis)
Ford v. Jackson Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 45 F.4th 1202 (10th Cir. 2022) (context matters in assessing combined hostile conduct)
Reznik v. inContact, Inc., 18 F.4th 1257 (10th Cir. 2021) (objective reasonableness inquiry for retaliation claims)
Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006) (materially adverse standard for retaliation)
Medina v. Income Support Div., N.M., 413 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 2005) (when reprimand can be an adverse action)