Goldsmith v. Bagby Eleator Co., Inc.

Decision Date17 January 2008
Docket NumberNo. 06-14440.,06-14440.
PartiesGreg GOLDSMITH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BAGBY ELEVATOR COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit

Marion F. Walker, Steven Michael Stastny, Ford & Harrison, LLP, Birmingham, AL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Cynthia Forman Wilkinson, Wilkinson Law Firm, PC, Larry R. Mann, Law Office of Larry Mann, Birmingham, AL, for Goldsmith.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

Before MARCUS and PRYOR, Circuit Judges, and LAND,* District Judge.

PRYOR, Circuit Judge:

Forty-five years ago, "the civil rights movement swirled into Birmingham, a city whose, bitter resistance to change made it a battleground." Jack Bass, Unlikely Heroes 201 (1981). Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. remarked, "If we can crack Birmingham, I am convinced we can crack the South. Birmingham is a symbol of segregation for the entire South." Id. By blood, toil, and tears, segregation was, of course, cracked in Birmingham, and today the city is led by its fourth black mayor and a majority-black city council. Against this historical backdrop, this appeal from the Northern District of Alabama offers, amid a host of technical issues, an important reminder: despite considerable racial progress, racism persists as an evil to be remedied in our Nation.

The main issue in this appeal is whether Bagby Elevator Company was entitled to a judgment as a matter of law against Greg Goldsmith's claim of retaliation when it is undisputed that Goldsmith's employment was terminated based on his refusal to sign a dispute resolution agreement that applied to his charge of racial discrimination pending with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Bagby Elevator appeals a jury verdict that awarded compensatory and punitive damages to Goldsmith based on his complaint of both racial discrimination and retaliation. See 42 U.S.C. § 1981; 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000e-17. In Weeks v. Harden Manufacturing Corp., 291 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir.2002), we ruled that a refusal to sign an arbitration agreement was not a protected activity that could support a claim of retaliation, but we did not address an employee's refusal to sign an agreement that applied to a pending charge of discrimination. Goldsmith was willing to execute an amended dispute resolution agreement that would not have applied to his pending charge, but Bagby Elevator insisted that Goldsmith sign an agreement that applied to the pending charge and fired him immediately after he refused to do so. We conclude that Bagby Elevator was not entitled to a judgment as a matter of law against Goldsmith's claim of retaliation because there was sufficient evidence of a causal relation between the filing of his pending charge and later termination. As a result, we need not decide any issue about the verdict regarding Goldsmith's alternative claim that he was terminated based on his race.

Bagby Elevator also challenges several other rulings of the district court, including rulings regarding the admissibility" of evidence, and the awards of punitive damages, attorney's fees, and costs to Goldsmith, all of which we affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in four of its evidentiary rulings: (1) evidence that Bagby Elevator discriminated and retaliated against Goldsmith's coworkers was relevant to prove the intent of Bagby Elevator to discriminate and retaliate and supported Goldsmith's claim of a hostile work environment; (2) evidence that Arthur Bagby III, the owner and president of Bagby Elevator, uttered the racial slur "nigger" in the presence of the employee who fired Goldsmith, but outside the workplace, suggested both that the employee who heard these comments had reason to believe that racial discrimination was tolerated at Bagby Elevator and that the antidiscrimination policy of Bagby Elevator was ineffective; (3) the testimony of a courtroom deputy that Arthur Bagby said to an employee-witness, "Go get 'em champ," immediately before the witness testified was not unduly prejudicial; and (4) the determination of the EEOC that there was reason to believe that Goldsmith's charge of discrimination was true was admissible based on our well-established precedents. We affirm the award of punitive damages, because there was sufficient evidence at trial that Bagby Elevator was recklessly indifferent to Goldsmith's federal rights and the ratio of that award to the award of compensatory damages, which is 9.2 to 1, is not so excessive as to violate due process. We also affirm the award of attorney's fees to Goldsmith who won substantial relief for his related claims against Bagby Elevator.

I. BACKGROUND

Before we address the merits of this appeal, we review two matters. First, we review the trial record regarding the relevant facts. Second, we review the procedural history of this litigation.

A. Facts

In March or April 1998, Bagby Elevator hired Goldsmith, a black man, to work in its shop in Birmingham, Alabama, as an elevator fabricator. Ron Farley, the shop foreman, offered Goldsmith the job and became Goldsmith's supervisor. In his employment with Bagby Elevator, Goldsmith delivered parts to job sites throughout the southeastern United States and assisted with the installation of those parts. As a fabricator, Goldsmith was also required to build elevator parts. Goldsmith also performed special projects for Arthur Bagby, which included building a wicket driver and installing lighting and light diffusers at Arthur Bagby's house.

Goldsmith performed his job well. He was assigned the majority of the duties of manufacturing specialty parts and items for elevators. Goldsmith received several raises in pay based on Farley's recommendations, and Bagby Elevator later designated Goldsmith as a lead man in the shop. Goldsmith enjoyed his work but testified that his employment was tainted by a racially hostile atmosphere.

Farley uttered racial slurs at work, but Goldsmith's complaint about Farley's slurs was rebuffed. In February 2001, Curlie Thomas, a black employee of Bagby Elevator, told Goldsmith that Farley had said to Thomas, "If I give a nigger ice cream, would he eat it?" Goldsmith reported Farley's racial slur to Vice President Arthur Steber, who told Goldsmith, "I've already heard." Goldsmith expressed concern about working with Farley and asked Steber if there was any reason that he needed to be worried about his job after learning of Farley's racial slurs. Steber replied, "Well Goldie, you know, that's just the way Ron [Farley] is. You are just going to have to accept it." Farley continued to supervise Goldsmith.

Farley's racial slurs at work continued to offend Goldsmith. Sometime after his complaint to Steber, Goldsmith went to Farley's office and overheard Farley say in a telephone conversation with a white employee, "Howard, them niggers are crazy. Them some of the dumbest niggers I ever seen in my life." Goldsmith opened Farley's office door after Farley uttered the racial slur, handed Farley a folder, shook his head, and walked out of Farley's office. Goldsmith testified that he did not report this comment because Steber had already told Goldsmith that he would have to accept Farley's behavior.

Farley's nephew, David Walker, also contributed to the racially hostile atmosphere that Goldsmith experienced while employed at Bagby Elevator. Goldsmith worked in the shop with Walker, who is white, and heard Walker utter racial slurs. Goldsmith heard Walker call Anthony Jemison, a black man who worked with them, a "monkey" on several occasions. Goldsmith also heard Walker tell Jemison, "Monkey, get back in your cage." Larry Isbell, a white employee who worked in the shop, also heard Walker's "monkey" comments. Walker told Goldsmith that Walker and Farley were "going to fuck them a black lady before they die." On one occasion, Goldsmith, Walker, Isbell, and Jemison sat together during a break and Walker said, "You know, I really never liked black folks no how."

In addition to uttering racial slurs, Walker threatened Goldsmith with violence. Specifically, Walker told Goldsmith that Walker was going to make Goldsmith's son an orphan. Isbell overheard this comment by Walker and reported it to Farley because Isbell feared that Walker was going to kill Goldsmith. Isbell told Farley that there was "bad blood" between Goldsmith and Walker. Farley said he would not do anything except separate Walker and Goldsmith. Farley did not separate Walker and Goldsmith, and they continued to work together after this incident.

Goldsmith also believed that his efforts to obtain a promotion were hampered by racial barriers at Bagby. When Goldsmith applied to Larry Gardner at the union for a higher-paying field position, Gardner reported to Goldsmith that Johnny Bowden, the purchasing manager at Bagby Elevator, had said they would not interview Goldsmith for the position because "they don't mix the front and the back." Goldsmith testified that the majority of workers in the shop were black and that Bagby Elevator never had a black employee in the field.

Bagby Elevator had an antidiscrimination policy that was printed in the employee handbook issued to all employees. There were three versions of the employee handbook, one issued in 1995 and two revised versions issued in 1998 and 2000, and all three contained the policy against the use of racial slurs. The 2000 version of the handbook explained the antidiscrimination policy in a section entitled "Equal Employment Opportunities":

The company does not discriminate on the basis of a person's race, religion, color, age, sex, national origin, handicap or disability regarding any term or condition of employment including but not limited to hiring, training, on-the-job treatment, promotion, discipline, and termination. It is the responsibility of all employees to practice fair treatment toward everyone at all times. Any violation of these equal opportunity...

To continue reading

Request your trial
678 cases
  • Anderson v. Dunbar Armored, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia
    • August 18, 2009
    ...the Eleventh Circuit held that the elements of retaliation claims under Title VII and § 1981 are the same. Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co., Inc., 513 F.3d 1261, 1277 (11th Cir.2008). Therefore, the Court applies the same framework to Ms. Anderson's retaliation claims, whether brought under ......
  • Williams v. First Advantage LNS Screening Solutions Inc., No. 17-11447
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • January 9, 2020
    ...addition to economic harm). Citing Bogle v. McClure , 332 F.3d 1347, 1359, 1362 (11th Cir. 2003) and Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Company, Inc. , 513 F.3d 1261, 1275, 1283 (11th Cir. 2008), McGinnis noted that we have at least twice upheld substantial punitive damages awards when the underly......
  • Gogel v. KIA Motors Mfg. of Ga., Inc., No. 16-16850
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • July 29, 2020
    ...required a showing "that the protected activity and the adverse action were not wholly unrelated."13 Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co. , 513 F.3d 1261, 1277–78 (11th Cir. 2008) (quoting Simmons v. Camden Cty. Bd. of Educ. , 757 F.2d 1187, 1189 (11th Cir. 1985) ). The burden of production then......
  • Monaghan v. Worldpay US, Inc., No. 17-14333
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • April 2, 2020
    ...standard governing retaliation claims brought under Title VII and § 1981 is the same in this Circuit. See Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co., 513 F.3d 1261, 1277 (11th Cir. 2008) ("To establish a claim of retaliation under Title VII or section 1981, a plaintiff must prove that he engaged in st......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 books & journal articles
  • Administrative Decisions and Materials
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Employment Evidence
    • April 1, 2022
    ...cannot conclude that the district court abused its discretion when it admitted the EEOC determination.” Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co ., 513 F.3d 1261, 1288-89 (11th Cir. 2008) (quoting Barfield v. Orange Cty ., 911 F.2d 644, 651 n.8 (citations omitted)). Recognizing that although an EEOC ......
  • Race and national origin discrimination
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Federal Employment Jury Instructions - Volume I
    • April 30, 2014
    ...claim, does not meet the burden of a non-retaliatory reason for the adverse employment action. Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co., Inc. , 513 F.3d 1261, 1279 (11th Cir. 2008). References: Right to jury trial in action for retaliatory discharge from employment, 52 A.L.R. 4th 1141. §3:320.10 Tit......
  • Defendant's Prior Acts
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Employment Evidence
    • April 1, 2022
    ...404(b) in order to, among other things, demonstrate the racial intent of a common decisionmaker. Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co., Inc ., 513 F.3d 1261 (11th Cir. 2008). §4:230.2 Evidence Excluded Second Circuit The District Court prevented Plaintiff from testifying about statements made to ......
  • Deposing & examining lay witnesses
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Deposing & Examining Employment Witnesses
    • March 31, 2022
    ...country.” Green v. Franklin Nat’l Bank of Minneapolis, 459 F.3d 903, 911 (8th Cir. 2006); see also Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co., Inc., 513 F.3d 1261, 1269 (11th Cir. 2008) (describing “racial slurs,” including the term “monkey” that were used against an African–American employee); Walker......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT