Blackburn v. Seton Hall University, Civil Action No. 02-3038 (D. N.J. 1/7/2004)

• Decision Date: 07 January 2004
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 02-3038.
• Parties: REGINA BLACKBURN, Plaintiff, v. SETON HALL UNIVERSITY, MARK ROCHA, individually and in his official capacity, WILLIAM SALES, individually and in his official capacity, JAMES VAN OOSTING, individually and in his official capacity, CHRYSANTHY M. GRIECO, individually and in her official capacity, STEPHEN McPHEE, individually and in his official capacity, MARTHA CARPENTIER, individually and in her official capacity, MAURICE ENE, individually and in his official capacity, INGRID HALL, individually and in her official capacity, EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-50, and XYZ ENTITIES 1-50 (being fictitiously pleaded defendants as more specifically described in the body of the complaint, and which description is incorporated into this caption by reference), Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

Page 1

REGINA BLACKBURN, Plaintiff, v. SETON HALL UNIVERSITY, MARK ROCHA, individually and in his official capacity, WILLIAM SALES, individually and in his official capacity, JAMES VAN OOSTING, individually and in his official capacity, CHRYSANTHY M. GRIECO, individually and in her official capacity, STEPHEN McPHEE, individually and in his official capacity, MARTHA CARPENTIER, individually and in her official capacity, MAURICE ENE, individually and in his official capacity, INGRID HALL, individually and in her official capacity, EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-50, and XYZ ENTITIES 1-50 (being fictitiously pleaded defendants as more specifically described in the body of the complaint, and which description is incorporated into this caption by reference), Defendants.

Civil Action No. 02-3038.

United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

January 7, 2004.

Thomas R. Ashley, Esq., Newark, New Jersey, Attorney for Plaintiff.

Steven Gerber, Esq., Patti A. Scott, Esq, GERBER & SAMSON, L.L.C. Wayne, New Jersey, Attorneys for Defendants.

OPINION

DICKINSON R. DEBEVOISE, Senior District Judge.

Dr. Regina Blackburn ("Dr. Blackburn") was a professor of African American Studies and English at Seton Hall University ("Seton Hall" or "the university") for six years. Her application for tenure and promotion to the position of Associate Professor ("tenure application") was denied in Spring 2000.

Dr. Blackburn filed suit in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, alleging (1) that the denial of her tenure application was discriminatory, (2) that she was affirmatively prevented from developing the qualifications required for tenure, (3) that she was subjected to a hostile work environment while employed at Seton Hall, (4) that she experienced retaliation for complaining about the treatment she had received, and (5) that she was paid a discriminatorily low salary. She brought state tort law claims and claims of race- and gender-based discrimination¹ under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII"), the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 10:5-1, et seq. ("NJLAD"), 42 U.S.C. § 1981 ("§ 1981"), 42 U.S.C. § 1985 ("§ 1985"), 42 U.S.C. § 1986 ("§ 1986"), and 42 U.S.C. § 1988 ("§ 1988").²

Named as defendants were Seton Hall, and (in their individual as well as official capacities) the university's former Provost Mark Rocha ("Provost Rocha"), former Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences at Seton Hall James Van Oosting ("Dean Van Oosting"), Chair of the African American Studies Department William Sales ("Dr. Sales"), former Chair of the English Department Chysanthy M. Grieco ("Dr. Grieco"), current Chair of the English Department Martha Carpentier ("Dr. Carpentier"), Coordinator of the Center for Learning, Instruction and Assessment with Seton Hall's Educational Opportunity Program Maurice O. Ene ("Ene"), and Assistant Director of the Education Opportunity Program Ingrid Hill ("Hill")³ (collectively, "Defendants").

Defendants removed the case to federal court in June 2002. They have now moved for summary judgment as to all claims. The court will grant Defendants' motion because Dr. Blackburn has come forward with insufficient evidence to preserve a question of fact on any of her claims.

This is not to suggest that Dr. Blackburn's experience as an employee of Seton Hall was pleasant. The voluminous documents submitted by the parties in this case⁴ paint a picture of a professor whose joint appointment to the African American Studies and English Departments served her poorly. F rom the record it appears likely that Dr. Blackburn was, for example, expected to do the administrative work of two departments, but wasn't given the relief from teaching obligations that a professor appointed fully to one department would have received. This situation is undeniably unfortunate, but because the record does not indicate that it was attributable to discriminatory animus on the part of any of the Defendants, it is not actionable under federal or state anti-discrimination law, and the court is not empowered to remedy it.

BACKGROUND⁵

I. Facts relating to discriminatory denial of tenure claim and retaliation claim

A. Dr. Blackburn's first five years at Seton Hall

On July 22, 1994, Seton Hall appointed Dr. Blackburn jointly to the African American Studies and English Departments as a tenure-track Assistant Professor.⁶ In the letter of appointment, Dr. Blackburn was informed, inter alia: (1) that the African American Studies Department would be her "primary department," and the English Department would be her secondary Department, (2) that in accordance with University policy, she would be evaluated annually and that her tenure review would occur in Fall 1999, and (3) that "[f]aculty members must meet the requirements for tenure as spelled out in the Faculty Guide and appropriate Departmental documents."

Over the five years in between her appointment and her tenure review, Dr. Blackburn taught at least two classes each semester in the African American Studies Department. These classes (which were usually cross-listed with the English Department) included Early African American Literature, Literature of the Harlem Renaissance, and Contemporary African Literature. Additionally, every semester but one (Spring 1997), Dr. Blackburn taught two classes that were listed solely in the English Department. These classes were more "remedial," or basic, than the classes Dr. Blackburn taught in the African American Studies Department. They were Basic Skills, College English I, and College English II.

Between 1994 and 1999, Dr. Blackburn also participated enthusiastically in university life at Seton Hall. For example, she brought speakers to and organized conferences on campus, organized off-campus trips for students, and served as faculty advisor to the Black Student Union and as a mentor to new freshman in the Educational Opportunity Program ("EOP").

During her time at Seton Hall, Dr. Blackburn was less active as a scholar than as a teacher and participant in university life. It was generally understood among most of the members of the Seton Hall faculty and administration that publishing in peer-reviewed journals was the sine qua non of tenure.⁷ Over the years, supervisors and colleagues reminded Dr. Blackburn often and in many contexts of the importance of such publications to her prospects for tenure.⁸ Dr. Blackburn concedes that she recognized that "[p]ublication is extremely important, and is often a key factor in obtaining tenure." Complaint ¶ 11. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that she published a single piece in a peer-reviewed journal during her entire time at Seton Hall.

Dr. Blackburn complains that she was unable to publish because she was frequently denied "release time" (reduction in courseload) to work on her scholarship, and was consistently assigned to teach English 1201 , a class that required her to grade copious student papers. Dr. Blackburn claims white assistant professors were treated differently in this regard. "Nothing that I complained about, nothing that I asked about was granted," she claims, "and I observed [the English Department Chair] almost ushering in the three white candidates for tenure." RB Dep at 198.

Dr. Blackburn also claims that she was inadequately "mentored" and assisted in developing her resume in preparation for tenure review by her departments' Chairs, Dr. Grieco and Dr. Sales. For example, Dr. Sales would not agree to co-author an article with her because their "writing styles were too different," RB Dep at 44. Dr. Grieco encouraged her to continue with the novel she was writing, neglecting to "warn her that her time should be used for writings that could qualify for tenure approval," RB Dec 21, and failed explicitly to make her aware that she could volunteer for administrative positions in the English Department that would qualify her for release time. Dr. Blackburn's Opposition Brief at 14. The court will address these claims in Section III of the Discussion portion of this Opinion.

As promised, Dr. Blackburn was reviewed annually by the departments in which she taught. Defendants have submitted some but not all of the evaluation reports from these annual reviews. A perusal of the reports reveals that Dr. Blackburn's performance was regarded positively at first, but that concerns about her teaching, lack of publications and involvement with the affairs of the English Department multiplied as time went on.

For example, the African American Studies Department's evaluation from 1995 was largely positive, praising Dr. Blackburn's teaching ability and expressing optimism about her future publications and scholarship. The English Department's evaluation for the next year praised Dr. Blackburn's participation in the English Department's Basic Skills Committee and Open House for the recruitment of freshmen, but expressed concern about her lack of visibility in and availability to the English Department, her teaching style, and the low enrollment in her courses. The English Department evaluation from Dr. Blackburn's fourth year lists instances of Dr. Blackburn's service to the university, but expresses concern about low enrollments in her classes, student complaints about Dr. Blackburn's missing classes, and Dr. Blackburn's lack of full involvement in the affairs of the English Department. The English Department's fifth year evaluation reports a high level of student satisfaction with Dr. Blackburn's classes, but expresses dismay that Dr. Blackburn was not a member of any of the English Department's committees and that she had published nothing in her time at Seton Hall.

In Spring 1999, all but one of the faculty members in the English Department voted to keep Dr. Blackburn on for another year. In their ballots, however, several faculty members expressed concern that Dr. Blackburn might not be eligible for tenure in the fall given her...