Adams v. C3 Pipeline Constr., Inc.
| Decision Date | 06 March 2020 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 18-925 KG/GBW |
| Parties | JESSICA ADAMS, Plaintiff, v. C3 PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION, INC., Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico |
THIS MATTER comes before me pursuant to the Court's Order of Reference (doc. 28) and the damages hearing conducted on October 28, 2019 (docs. 51, 62, 63). For the reasons that follow, I RECOMMEND modification of the Court's Default Judgment (doc. 23) in conformity with the claims and theories dropped by Plaintiff prior to trial, and an entry of damages in the total amount of $20,050,000.
This case was removed to federal court by Defendant Plains All American Pipeline, LP, from the First Judicial District Court of New Mexico on October 3, 2018. Doc. 1. Defendants Alpha Crude Connector, LLC; Plains All American GP, LLC; Plains All American Pipeline, LP; Plains GP, LLC; and Plains Pipeline, LP (collectively, "Plains Defendants") filed their answer to the complaint on October 10, 2018, and concurrently filed for summary judgment. Docs. 4, 6.
On May 23, 2019, the Court granted summary judgment and denied Plaintiff's Rule 56(d) request for additional discovery. Doc. 16. All claims against the Plains Defendants were thereby dismissed. Doc. 18. On the same day, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, directing Plaintiff to either effect service on Defendant C3 Pipeline Construction, Inc. or provide the Court with a written explanation why service had not been effected. Doc. 17. Plaintiff filed an Affidavit of Service on June 6, 2019, indicating that Cody Martin, the owner of C3 Pipeline Construction, Inc., had been served at 426 Horseshoe Road, Winnfield, LA 71483 at 9:30 a.m. CDT on May 30, 2019. Doc. 19. Based on Defendant C3 Pipeline's failure to answer the complaint or make an appearance on the record, Plaintiff moved for entry of default judgment on June 23, 2019. Doc. 21. The Clerk's Entry of Default was filed on June 24, 2019. Doc. 22.
On July 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion and entered default judgment on all issues of liability in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant C3 Pipeline Construction, Inc.1 Doc. 23. On August 5, 2019, the Court entered an order referring the case to the undersigned in order to conduct a Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2)(B) damages hearing in the form of a jury trial. Doc. 28. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that, in the case of a default judgment, the court "may conduct hearings ormake referrals—preserving any federal statutory right to a jury trial—when, to enter or effectuate judgment, it needs to . . . determine the amount of damages." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2)(B).
A two-day hearing to assess the amount of damages was held before a jury on October 28, 2019. Doc. 51. The jury reached a verdict of $15,000,000 in compensatory damages and $40,000,000 in punitive damages. Doc. 56. Final entry of default judgment is now before the Court.
As a result of Defendant C3 Pipeline's default, the following facts were deemed admitted:2
(1) Plaintiff Jessica Adams was employed by Defendant C3 Pipeline to lay crude oil pipeline in southeastern New Mexico between 2015 and 2016.
(2) From Fall of 2015 to June of 2016, and again from August of 2016 to September of 2016, Plaintiff was sexually harassed by three fellow employees. These employees were Mike Carrithers, the purchasing manager for C3 Pipeline; Danny Robertson, a fellow employee; and Craig Arnault, foreman of the C3 Pipeline crew based out of Hobbs, New Mexico. Craig Arnault acted as Plaintiff's supervisor.
(3) Arnault made it a condition of Plaintiff Adams' employment that she perform sexual favors for him in order to keep her job. Carrithers and Robertson represented to Plaintiff Adams that it was a condition of her employment that she perform sexual favors for them in order to keep her job.
(4) Carrithers, Robertson, and Arnault repeatedly and unwantedly touched Plaintiff Adams in sexually offensive ways.
(5) Craig Arnault additionally engaged in the following behaviors: sending Plaintiff Adams offensive and unwanted pornographic images; making sexually explicit comments; and making comments with reference to Plaintiff Adams participating in sexual activity.
(6) In addition to protesting to Arnault and Carrithers, Plaintiff Adams contacted corporate management of a related company to complain about the sexually harassing conduct.
(7) In response to Plaintiff Adams' complaints and refusal to perform sexual acts with him, Craig Arnault repeatedly threatened to fire her.
(8) C3 Pipeline took no action to investigate Plaintiff Adams' complaints.
See doc. 1-1; doc. 45 at 11.
In addition to deeming these facts admitted, the Court found Defendant C3 Pipeline liable on every claim alleged by Plaintiff in her Complaint. Doc. 23 (). These claims were asfollows: sexual harassment in violation of Title VII and the New Mexico Human Rights Act ("NMHRA"), retaliation in violation of Title VII and the NMHRA, battery, slander and libel per se, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, gross negligence, and negligent hiring, training, retention, and supervision. See doc. 1-1.
Following the entry of a default judgment on liability, the court must "determine the amount of damages." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2)(B). Plaintiff requested a jury trial in order to assess her damages, which the Court granted. See docs. 25, 28. "[A]bsent an award so excessive or inadequate as to shock the judicial conscience and to raise an irresistible inference that passion, prejudice, corruption, or other improper cause invaded the trial, the jury's determination of [damages] is considered inviolate." Karns v. Emerson Electric Co., 817 F.2d 1452, 1460 (10th Cir. 1987) (internal citations and quotation omitted) (alteration in original).
"When state substantive law governs a claim for relief, state law also provides the appropriate standard for a district court's decision as to whether the verdict was excessive." Racher v. Westlake Nursing Home Ltd. P'ship, 871 F.3d 1152, 1167 (10th Cir. 2017) (). Under New Mexico law, as under federal law, "[a] jury's damages award will be upheld unless it appears that the amount awarded is so grosslyout of proportion to the injury received as to shock the conscience." Morga v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., 420 P.3d 586, 593 (N.M. Ct. App. 2018) (citation omitted).
As a preliminary matter, the undersigned recommends several amendments to the Court's entry of default judgment as to liability in this case. A defaulting defendant "admits to a complaint's well-pleaded facts and forfeits his or her ability to contest those facts." Tripodi v. Welch, 810 F.3d 761, 764 (10th Cir. 2016). By defaulting in this case, Defendant C3 Pipeline therefore admitted to all of the well-pleaded facts contained in Plaintiff's Complaint. However, Id. at 765 (citing Bixler v. Foster, 596 F.3d 751, 762 (10th Cir. 2010)). This principle means that the facts alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint, admitted as true by Defendant C3 Pipeline, must adequately support each of the claims for which default judgment is entered.
Prior to the damages hearing, Plaintiff voluntarily agreed to make several modifications to the entry of liability against Defendant C3 Pipeline.3 Accordingly, I recommend modification of the entry of default judgment as follows to include the agreed-upon changes.
Plaintiff agreed to dismissal of two of her claims during the pretrial conference held on October 22, 2019. See doc. 42 at 1-2. Specifically, the Complaint included claims of slander and libel per se against Defendant C3 Pipeline. See doc. 1-1 at 7. Plaintiff alleged:
New Mexico law does not distinguish between slander and libel, treating both as claims for defamation. Smith v. Durden, 276 P.3d 943, 948 (N.M. 2012). The tort of defamation, as set forth in New Mexico's Uniform Jury Instructions, has nine elements. Fikes v. Furst, 81 P.3d 545, 549 (N.M. 2003) (citing UJI 13-1002(B) NMRA 2003). One of these elements is publication. UJI 13-1002(B)(1) NMRA 2003. "Publication is an intentional or negligent communication to one other than the person defamed." Id. at 13-1003 (emphasis added).
In her Complaint, however, Plaintiff alleged only that one of Defendant's employees made offensive comments "to Jessica Adams [Plaintiff]." Doc. 1-1 at 7. Recognizing that she had not alleged facts sufficient to establish defamation, Plaintiffagreed to dismiss her claims of libel and slander prior to the damages hearing. The undersigned recommends that the Court modify its entry of default accordingly.
To the extent that the Court entered default judgment on particular theories of liability contained in Plaintiff's Complaint, Plaintiff voluntarily dropped two theories of liability before the damages hearing and I recommend a corresponding modification of the entry of default.
First, Plaintiff agreed to drop her theory that Defendant C3 Pipeline was either directly or vicariously liable based on the supervisory conduct of Danny Robertson and Mike Carrithers. See doc. 42 at 2. These theories of supervisory liability were originally alleged with respect to the following claims: sexual...
To continue reading
Request your trial