Buchanan v. Alexander
| Decision Date | 10 January 2018 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION 16–41–SDD–EWD |
| Parties | Teresa BUCHANAN v. F. King ALEXANDER, Damon Andrew, A.G. Monaco, and Gaston Reinoso |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana |
Floyd J. Falcon, Jr., Avant & Falcon, Baton Rouge, LA, Lisa B. Zycherman, Pro Hac Vice, Robert Corn–Revere, Pro Hac Vice, Ronald G. London, Pro Hac Vice, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff.
Sheri M. Morris, Daigle, Fisse & Kessenich, Carlton Jones, III, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on the cross Motions for Summary Judgment1 by Defendants, F. King Alexander, Damon Andrew, A.G. Monaco, and Gaston Reinoso ("Defendants") and Plaintiff, Teresa Buchanan ("Plaintiff"). The parties have filed Oppositions2 and Replies3 to the cross-motions. On September 25, 2017, the Court held Oral Argument on limited issues raised in the Parties' motions, and the Court allowed the Parties to submit post-hearing memoranda.4 The Court has considered all of the evidence presented, the arguments of counsel, and the law as applied to the undisputed facts of this case. For the following reasons, the Court finds that summary judgment should be granted in favor of the Defendants.
This lawsuit arises out of the termination of Plaintiff's position of tenured professor by the Board of Supervisors ("the Board")5 of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College ("LSU").6 The Defendants are: F. King Alexander ("Alexander"), President and Chancellor of LSU; Damon Andrew ("Dean Andrew"), Dean of the College of Human Sciences and Education at LSU; A.G. Monaco ("Monaco"), the Vice Chancellor of the Office of Human Resource Management at LSU; and Gaston Reinoso ("Reinoso"), the Director of the Office of Human Resource Management and Executive Director of Equal Employment Opportunities at LSU.
Plaintiff joined the faculty of LSU in 1995 and was promoted to Associate Professor with tenure in 2001.7 Plaintiff created LSU's "Early Childhood Program," a teacher education program for pre-school through third-grade instruction known as the "PK–3" program.8 Plaintiff is widely published in top academic journals and claims she had demonstrated significant success in securing funding for both her research and early childhood initiatives at LSU.9 Prior to the inception of the underlying conduct at issue, Plaintiff was recommended for a promotion to Full Professor following a review process that included the approvals of a Tenure and Promotion Committee, the Director of the School of Education, and the Dean of the College of Human Sciences and Education, Defendant Andrew.10 However, Dean Andrew later rescinded this recommendation.11
In mid–November 2013, Ed Cancienne ("Cancienne"), Superintendent of the Iberville Parish Schools District, complained about Plaintiff's "professionalism and her behavior" during her visits to schools in his district while she was overseeing the PK–3 program.12 Cancienne was reportedly very upset because he heard that Plaintiff had been condescending to the teachers during her site visits with LSU student teachers and their mentor teachers.13 Plaintiff claims that, in response to this complaint, she attempted to "smooth Cancienne's ruffled feathers"14 by an email on that same day wherein she apologized for any offense and affirmed that his Parish was "full of excellent teachers and very bright students."15 Despite this apology, Plaintiff contends Cancienne called her personal cell phone and demanded that she come to his office and discuss the matter "just the two of us."16 Plaintiff admits she had no desire to meet with Cancienne alone as she had previously reported to Associate Dean Jennifer Curry ("Curry") that Cancienne had flirted with her and she thought him "creepy."17 Plaintiff maintains that Curry and another female LSU faculty member shared this view of Cancienne.18
After Cancienne and Plaintiff spoke on the phone about this incident, Cancienne called Curry to complain that he had been advised that, while Plaintiff was at an Iberville school to assess a PK–3 program student teacher, Plaintiff referred to Cancienne as "crazy", "talked awful about our schools," and used the word "pussy three times."19 In fact, Plaintiff claims Cancienne advised Curry that if Plaintiff returned to Iberville schools, he would "have her arrested."20 While Cancienne clearly objected to Plaintiff's use of the term "pussy," he claimed that he did not believe it was used in a sexual context or to engage in sexual harassment, but was used as part of Plaintiff's instruction to student teachers regarding coping with parents who may use different vocabularies.21 Plaintiff claims that LSU investigators never inquired into the nature of Cancienne's complaints and only assumed, without supporting evidence, that Plaintiff's use of the word "pussy" was slang for female genitalia.22 Further, Plaintiff contends that no one at LSU inquired into the actual nature of Cancienne's concerns, which she claims were primarily based on Plaintiff's criticism of his school and teachers and not related to any kind of sexual harassment.23
Student complaints also formed the basis of the investigation into Plaintiff's conduct. Curry testified that two of Plaintiff's students requested a meeting to discuss their complaints about Plaintiff's classroom behavior. Student 1 claimed she was offended by Plaintiff's comments about Student 1's sexual relationship with her fiancé. Student 1 stated that she was humiliated by Plaintiff's references to her sexual relationship in front of her classmates. According to Student 1:
Dr. Buchanan had offered them condoms, had told them it was unacceptable to become pregnant. And that if you chose to become a mother, that your grades would suffer for that. She told them ... enjoy the sex while the sex is—good. If you're dating—if you're dating, make sure the sex is good, something along those lines.24
Student 1 was also particularly offended when, after having advised Plaintiff that her fiancé was very supportive, Plaintiff allegedly responded, "yeah, he's supportive now while the sex is good, but just wait until you're married five years."25 Curry testified that Student 1 stated: "I don't know who she is to make these assumptions about me, and to say it in front of a room full of people."26
Student 1 also reported to Curry that Plaintiff had recorded a student (Student 2) crying during an assessment team meeting and played the recording back for the student.27 Student 2 met with Curry and complained that Plaintiff had intimidated and demeaned her by video recording this incident during a team assessment meeting. Regarding this incident, Dr. Curry testified:
... during her assessment team meeting, [the student] began to cry. She said that Dr. Buchanan was yelling at her. And that when she started to cry, Dr. Buchanan got out her cell phone and did not ask her, but started to record her crying and then played it back for her, she said, look at yourself, look at yourself, you need to check yourself in somewhere and get help, get a break.28
Curry further testified that Student 2 reported that this meeting was "mortifying,"29 and that:
Terry [Plaintiff] was extremely aggressive during this assessment team meeting. She said every time she tried to talk, Terry would say, shut up, you're not listening, be quiet, be quiet, like screaming at her, very aggressive. She said it was more than intimidating. Like she felt attacked, fearful.30
Plaintiff claims that no administrator met with her to discuss these allegations, and they never disclosed to her these student complaints.31 However, Plaintiff does not deny that these incidents took place. Plaintiff acknowledges that the administration obtained a written complaint in the winter of 2012 purporting to represent the views of Plaintiff's "Junior PK–3 Cohort" complaining that Plaintiff made several offensive comments, such as: (1) stating that "a woman is thought to be a dike if she wears brown pants"; (2) "it was a choice to be in the program and it was not the fault or problem of the professors if any of us chose to be mommies or wives and not to expect to get an A in the class"; and (3) that Plaintiff used "extreme profanity on a regular basis."32 Plaintiff contends "[i]t was never established the letter actually came from a ‘cohort’ and was not just a random complaint from a disgruntled student."33 Further, Plaintiff contends that there is no evidence that this student or cohort was speaking on behalf of anyone other than him/herself.34
Curry reported the student complaints to Dean Andrew who subsequently met with Dr. Earl Cheek ("Dr. Cheek"), Director of the College of Education, regarding same. Curry testified that Dr. Cheek advised that between ten and twelve students had come to his office and reported similar complaints about Plaintiff's behavior and her "talking about sex."35 Dr. Cheek further reported that local elementary school administrators had requested that Plaintiff not mentor students on their campuses. According to Curry, Dr. Cheek claimed he had relayed these complaints to Dean Lindsay (who preceded Dean Andrew) and to Human Resources but was advised nothing could be done because Plaintiff was tenured.36
Dean Andrew instructed Curry to gather all information regarding prior complaints, and, while in the process of doing this, Curry was contacted by Cancienne, who advised that Plaintiff was no longer authorized to be on any Iberville Parish school campus.37 After gathering additional evidence, Curry and Dean Andrew sought help from Human Resources regarding Plaintiff.38 Human Resources Management administrator Reinoso interviewed witnesses and reported his findings to Dean Andrew, who then recommended to Provost Bell the appointment of a Policy Statement–104 ("PS–104") Faculty Senate Grievance Committee (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Buchanan v. Alexander
...medical information to other students. The Committee found insufficient evidence to establish an ADA violation.5 Buchanan v. Alexander , 284 F.Supp.3d 792 (M.D. La. 2018).6 Serafine v. Branaman , 810 F.3d 354, 362 (5th Cir. 2016).7 MacLachlan v. ExxonMobil Corp. , 350 F.3d 472, 478 (5th Cir......