Falcó v. Puerto Rico Ports Auth.
| Decision Date | 29 August 2014 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL NO.: 12-1892 (MEL) |
| Parties | LINNETTE FALCÓN CUEVAS, Plaintiff, v. PUERTO RICO PORTS AUTHORITY, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Puerto Rico |
On October 24, 2012 Linnette Falcón Cuevas ("plaintiff" or "Falcón") filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1988 against the Puerto Rico Ports Authority ("PRPA" or the "Authority"), Gilberto Casillas Esquilín ("Casillas") in his individual and official capacity, and Ivelisse Castro Guzmán ("Castro") in her individual and official capacity, alleging discrimination on the basis of her political affiliation, in violation of the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and supplemental claims pursuant the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and Puerto Rico Law 100 of 1959 ("Law 100"), P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 29, § 146, et seq. and Law 115 of 1991 ("Law 115"), P.R. Laws Ann tit 11, § 1, et seq. ECF No. 1. On January 14, 2013, Casillas filed a motion to dismiss in his individual capacity pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). ECF No. 13. The court granted in part and denied in part said motion, dismissing plaintiff's Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment claims against all defendants, and denying the motion to dismiss in part with respect to Falcón's First Amendment politicaldiscrimination claim1 and denying it with respect her supplemental Puerto Rico law claims. ECF No. 19. On June 27, 2013 plaintiff was ordered to show cause as to why her claims against Castro should not be dismissed for failure to serve process on her within 120 days after the complaint was filed. ECF No. 18. On July 8, 2013, the court dismissed plaintiff's claims against Castro without prejudice. ECF No. 22. On April 3, 2014, Casillas2 and PRPA (collectively "defendants") filed a joint motion for summary judgment and on April 29, 2014 plaintiff filed a response in opposition. ECF Nos. 30; 52. For the reasons set forth below, defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part.
In February 2004, plaintiff acquired a trust position at the Authority as a Special Aide for former Executive Director under the Popular Democratic Party ("PDP") Administration. ECF No. 52-2, ¶ 1. Plaintiff is affiliated with and has worked closely with the PDP in political activities and fundraising activities, many of which were held at her home. Id. She has helped organize fundraising activities for Governor García Padilla and Governor Acevedo Víla. Id. She knows the governor personally and he has been at her house for political activities. Id. She has been a poll watcher. Id. In 2012 plaintiff obtained a Master's Degree in Human Resources ("HR") from the Ana G. Méndez University. ECF No. 52-2, ¶ 4. Plaintiff currently holds a careerposition as a Special Aide for the HR Office at the PRPA, but as of the date defendants moved for summary judgment plaintiff was on unpaid leave from the PRPA while occupying the position of Vice President of HR and Industrial Relations in Administration at the Metropolitan Bus Authority. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶¶ 1, 2; 52-1, ¶¶ 1, 2.
Casillas has been a New Progressive Party ("NPP") "follower" since childhood. ECF No. 52-2, ¶ 46. Casillas occupied the position of Director of HR at PRPA for four months, from April 2012 until July or August 2012.4 ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶¶ 3, 5, 28; 52-1, ¶¶ 3, 5, 28. After his term as Director of HR at PRPA, Casillas went to occupy the position of Deputy Executive Director of Administration; from September 2012 onwards Casillas was not plaintiff's direct supervisor. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶¶ 5, 29; 52-1, ¶¶ 5, 29.
When Casillas had entered the Authority as Director of HR he had been away from the HR field for many years and did not have a mastery over the agency's technical areas. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 38; 52-1, ¶ 38; 52-2, ¶ 9. When Casillas was the Director of HR, his supervisor was Ivelisse Castro ("Castro"), who then occupied the position of Deputy Executive Director of Administration. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 30; 52-1, ¶ 30. In conversations that Casillas had with Castro, he told her that he was worried about the task, and that he wanted the job to be "perfect and trustworthy." ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 39; 52-1, ¶ 39. Castro told him that he had numerous technical personnel in the department who are competent, "know what they have on their hands," and whose work was "trustworthy and good." Id.
Janet Vega ("Vega") has the career position of Specialist of HR at the Authority. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 32; 52-1, ¶ 30. She was occupying the position of interim Director of HR whenCasillas arrived at PRPA to assume the Director of HR position. Id. Vega directed the classification, retribution, recruitment, and selection division at the PRPA; she is a specialist in classification. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 37; 52-1, ¶ 37; 52-2, ¶ 9. Vega had numerous "technical duties" in her position at the PRPA, which she had not abandoned while she was interim Director of HR. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 39; 52-1, ¶ 39. Casillas asked Vega to help him with his new duties as Director of HR, and she agreed. ECF No. 52-2, ¶ 9.
Approximately fifteen years prior to becoming Director of HR at PRPA, Casillas worked for plaintiff's former husband, Hiram Cerezo-Suárez ("Cerezo-Suárez"), who had been the Commissioner of Municipal Affairs for Ex-Governor Rosselló in 1993-1994. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 11; 52-1, ¶ 11. Casillas had met plaintiff while working for Cerezo-Suárez. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 42; 52-1, ¶ 42.When Casillas saw plaintiff in his office he was happy to see her because he knew how she worked and that she was very responsible. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 12; 52-1, ¶ 12. Casillas met with the plaintiff and told her that he was counting on her to be his aide. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 41; 52-1, ¶ 41.
While Casillas was acting as Director of HR, plaintiff was concerned that she was not being assigned duties in accordance with her position. She attempted to resolve the matter by talking to Casillas, and Casillas requested that plaintiff write him a letter with her complaints. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶¶ 14, 15; 52-1, ¶¶ 14, 15; 52-2, ¶ 47. On June 15, 2012, Falcón wrote a letter to Casillas expressing her concern that she was not being assigned duties in accordance with her position. ECF No. 52-2, ¶ 52; ECF No. 57-6. On August 13, 2013, an attorney wrote a letter to the Executive Director of PRPA, Bernardo Vázquez ("Vázquez") on plaintiff's behalf, informing Vázquez of the letter Falcón sent to Casillas, at Casilla's request, and that Casillas had not met with plaintiff to discuss the contents of the letter or responded to the letter in writing. ECF No.52-2, ¶ 52; ECF No. 57-7. Plaintiff spoke with Vázquez about "the situation," informing him that since Casillas has assumed the role of Director of HR he had not given her any work. Id. ¶ 51; ECF No. 52-9, at 32. Vázquez told plaintiff that he would try to resolve the situation the same day, but she did not get assigned any work as a result of the conversation. Id.
In June 2012, plaintiff applied for the position of Head Assistant of Purchasing and Auctions.5 ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 9; 52-1, ¶ 9. The position would have resulted in a higher salary for plaintiff. ECF No. ECF No. 52-9, ¶ 26. Casillas was presented with a list of persons that had been determined to be qualified for the position. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 47; 52-1, ¶ 47. On July 13, 2012, plaintiff received a letter signed by Vega indicating that plaintiff did not qualify for the Head Assistant of Purchasing and Auctions position. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 16; 52-1, ¶ 16. Plaintiff requested a review with Mayra Montañez ("Montañez"), the HR specialist that evaluated her application. Id. Montañez informed plaintiff that she did not meet the experience requirements for the position. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 17; 52-1, ¶ 17. Montañez explained that she could not consider the full span of plaintiff's experience, but only half the time as experience. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 18; 52-1, ¶ 18. A consideration of half the time as experience would have filled the experience requirement for the position. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶¶ 18, 19; 52-1, ¶¶ 18, 19.
On July 24, 2012, plaintiff received a letter from Casillas reaffirming that she did not qualify for the position. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 20; 52-1, ¶ 20. When the plaintiff received the letter, she asked Casillas for a meeting to discuss her complaint regarding the experience not being credited to the job posting. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 21; 52-1, ¶ 21. Casillas told plaintiff that he would look at the matter calmly, evaluate it, and "consult to learn about it." ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 53; 52-1, ¶ 53. He informed her that he would meet with her after meeting with the legal adviser at thetime, Eric Rolón ("Rolón"). Id. Casillas consulted with Rolón about the issue. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 54; 52-1, ¶ 54. After the consultation, they concluded that the fact that plaintiff had been a member of the bid board for four years meant "that she had to have learned something even though she did not have the proper duties of a purchaser." Id. They applied her some points for the experience, and plaintiff was eligible for the position. Id.
On August 2, 2012, plaintiff received a letter from Casillas stating that she had been included in the eligible register for the Head Assistant of Purchasing and Auctions position and was provided with a date for an interview. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶¶ 23, 54; 52-1, ¶¶ 23, 54. Plaintiff was interviewed for the position by a panel composed by Counsel Rolón, Casillas, and Maria Isabel Sierra. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 24; 52-1, ¶ 24. Technicians from the "recruitment area" provided the panel with documents containing a point system; the applicants points were calculated, the technicians tabulated the results, and presented the results to Casillas. ECF Nos. 30-1, ¶ 56; 52-1, ¶ 56. Then, a letter containing the calculations was sent to the Executive Director for him to make...
To continue reading
Request your trial