Wilson v. Moulison North Corp., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5696

Plaintiff Arthur Ray Wilson, African-American, alleges a racially hostile workplace at Moulison North Corporation beginning May 2006.
Coworkers Stineford and Small repeatedly used racial slurs; Polley intervened minimally but harassment persisted.
Wilson reported initial harassment to owner Moulison, who promptly reprimanded the offending coworkers.
Moulison warned that any repetition would result in termination; policy allowed warnings, suspension, or termination depending on severity.
Wilson later experienced ongoing harassment and injuries while at work, but did not report further issues to Moulison or Rowe.
Wilson sued in federal court under Title VII for hostile environment and retaliation; district court granted summary judgment for defendant.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Liability for initial harassment by coworkers	Wilson argues employer failed to impose adequate discipline for initial harassment.	Moulison promptly disciplined offenders within policy; discipline was appropriate and timely.	Summary judgment for employer; initial discipline was timely and appropriate.
Liability for subsequent harassment after notice	Polley’s awareness constituted notice to the company, making employer liable for later harassment.	Polley was not a supervisor; there was no delegation of notice; plaintiff failed to follow policy.	No liability; Polley lacked authority, and plaintiff did not report to the proper channel per policy.
Whether notice to an apparent or de facto supervisor can trigger liability	Polley acted as a de facto supervisor or was delegated authority to receive complaints.	Polley had no sufficient authority or delegation; plaintiff’s belief is insufficient without evidence.	No liability; lack of supervisory authority and absence of explicit delegation negate notice.

Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) (establishes hostile environment standard)
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) (employer liability requires both objective and subjective hostility and employer response)
Noviello v. City of Boston, 398 F.3d 76 (1st Cir. 2005) (coemployee harassment; liability for employer requires negligence after notice)
Crowley v. L.L. Bean, Inc., 303 F.3d 387 (1st Cir. 2002) (distinguishes supervisor vs coworker liability framework)
White v. N.H. Dept. of Corr., 221 F.3d 254 (1st Cir. 2000) (notice and remedy requirements for employer liability)
Forrest v. Brinker Int'l Payroll Co., 511 F.3d 225 (1st Cir. 2007) (case-by-case assessment of prompt and appropriate remedial action)
Williamson v. City of Houston, 148 F.3d 462 (5th Cir. 1998) (notice to supervisor or designated recipient triggers knowledge)
Lapka v. Chertoff, 517 F.3d 974 (7th Cir. 2008) (progressive discipline and factual evaluation at the time of conduct)