Sheryl Taylor v. Timothy Geithner, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2

Taylor, an IRS employee, entered a 2005 settlement resolving an EEO discrimination claim with the IRS that included noncompliance-reporting procedures; she alleges the IRS breached the settlement and that her supervisor retaliated against her.
Taylor repeatedly claimed noncompliance by the IRS and filed EEO and Treasury department complaints between 2004 and 2005, culminating in a November 2006 final agency decision adverse to Taylor but noting current compliance.
Taylor alleged a September 2004–October 2005 sequence of adverse actions by her supervisor, including reprimands, a three-day suspension, and negative references; these actions supported by evidence, according to Taylor, suggest retaliation.
On October 22, 2008, Taylor filed suit in the Western District of Tennessee asserting breach-of-settlement-agreement and Title VII retaliation claims against Geithner, who moved to dismiss and for summary judgment.
The district court dismissed the breach-of-settlement claim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and granted summary judgment on the retaliation claim; the Sixth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the breach claim but reversed on retaliation, remanding for further proceedings.
The court held no express waiver of sovereign immunity for breach-of-settlement claims under Title VII; however, Taylor’s retaliation claim survives and requires further proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Congress waived sovereign immunity for breach-of-settlement-agreement claims	Taylor argues Title VII remedies apply to breaches of settlement with the government.	Geithner argues no express waiver; 29 C.F.R. § 1614.504 does not authorize federal-court enforcement of a settlement.	No express waiver; dismissal affirmed.
Whether Taylor shows a prima facie retaliation case under Title VII	Taylor asserts protected activity and adverse actions with causal link evidenced by timing and references.	Geithner contends absence of material adverse actions and lack of causal connection.	Taylor established prima facie retaliation; district court's grant of summary judgment reversed; remand for proceedings.

Lindstrom v. United States, 510 F.3d 1191 (10th Cir. 2007) (no waiver for breach of settlement; 1614.504 silent on civil actions)
Munoz v. Mabus, 630 F.3d 856 (9th Cir. 2010) (no sovereign-immunity waiver for breach of Title VII settlement)
Frahm v. United States, 492 F.3d 258 (4th Cir. 2007) (Title VII sovereign immunity not extended to monetary breach claims)
Abbott v. Crown Motor Co., 348 F.3d 537 (6th Cir. 2003) (adverse reference can be actionable under retaliation framework)
Mickey v. Zeidler Tool & Die Co., 516 F.3d 516 (6th Cir. 2008) (temporal proximity can establish causation in prima facie case)
Hunter v. Sec’y of U.S. Army, 565 F.3d 986 (6th Cir. 2009) (prima facie retaliation elements; causation minimal burden)
Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (U.S. 2006) (retaliation standard; adverse action must deter a reasonable worker)
Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (U.S. 1998) (define tangible employment action; context of adverse actions)