Candolfi v. Allterra Grp., LLC
| Decision Date | 30 March 2022 |
| Docket Number | 481, Sept. Term, 2021 |
| Citation | 254 Md.App. 221,272 A.3d 829 |
| Parties | Melissa CANDOLFI v. ALLTERRA GROUP, LLC |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Argued by: Ryan T. West (West and West, PA, Berlin, MD), all on the brief, for Appellant.
Argued by: Bruce F. Bright (Spencer A. Cropper, Ayres, Jenkins, Gordy & Almand PA, Ocean City, MD), all on the brief, for Appellee.
Nazarian, Leahy, Glenn T. Harrell, Jr. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.
This appeal challenges an order granting summary judgment on a wrongful discharge complaint and an order of direct civil contempt. Melissa Candolfi alleged that her employer, Allterra Group, LLC ("Allterra"), terminated her wrongfully upon learning that she was pregnant, in violation of public policy. The Circuit Court for Worcester County found that Ms. Candolfi had failed to produce evidence of Allterra's discriminatory intent and granted Allterra's motion for summary judgment. In doing so, the trial court refused to consider Ms. Candolfi's untimely response to Allterra's summary judgment motion and her unsigned affidavit that accompanied it. The court also found Ms. Candolfi's attorney, Ryan West, in direct civil contempt after he failed to appear at the hearing on the summary judgment motion. Ms. Candolfi and Mr. West appeal, and we affirm the summary judgment and reverse the order of direct civil contempt.
We view the facts in the light most favorable to the underlying plaintiff, Ms. Candolfi, the non-moving party at summary judgment. Kennedy Krieger Inst., Inc. v. Partlow , 460 Md. 607, 632, 191 A.3d 425 (2018) (citing Chateau Foghorn LP v. Hosford , 455 Md. 462, 482, 168 A.3d 824 (2017) ).
Allterra is a real property appraisal business based in Ocean City. Allterra hired Ms. Candolfi as a Marketing Director on January 2, 2018 at an initial salary of $36,000 per year. Joan Trice, Allterra's CEO, called Ms. Candolfi to offer her the job. The offer letter from Ms. Trice that followed stated that Allterra "is an employer at will and continuation of employment ... is dependent upon the attainment and maintenance of satisfactory performance." The letter also stated that Ms. Candolfi would report directly to Ms. Trice and would be "responsible for developing and managing the Allterra Group marketing efforts which include marketing plans for Valuation Expo; editing and management of our online newsletter; social media campaigns; and editing of our print magazines."
Ms. Candolfi insists that she only agreed to the $36,000 salary because "it was understood and agreed upon that it was a full-time remote position ...." Allterra contends that Ms. Candolfi requested a salary of $42,000 and that Allterra "intended to consider raising her to $42,000.00 after six months, depending on performance." In any event, Ms. Candolfi received a raise of $2,500.00 in or about July 2018. She also received bonuses of $500 each in March 2018 and December 2018 after working on-site at Valuation Expos. The parties dispute whether the raise and bonuses were the result of satisfactory performance.
Ms. Candolfi announced on a group call on January 14, 2019 that she was pregnant. She followed up with an email to Ms. Trice on January 28, who acknowledged the pregnancy positively and referenced the "growing Allterra family[.]" But things took a turn shortly after, when on February 8, 2019, Ms. Candolfi underwent her one-year performance review with Allterra's Chief Operating Officer, Crispin Bennett. Ms. Candolfi received a copy of a written "Employee Review" showing several areas that needed improvement. She met or exceeded expectations in three out of seven categories but was rated "Some Improvement Needed" in the remaining four, including "Editing Content," "Social Media Marketing," "Promotion of Valuation Expo," and "Special Edition and Advertising Messages." As a result, Allterra asked Ms. Candolfi to make cold calls to potential Valuation Expo attendees, to develop a LinkedIn page, and most importantly, to "report to the office ... and [ ] work from 9-5 each day from the office until such a time as improvements are made and the improved level of work is well documented, and permission is given by Crispin[.]"
After giving her the one-year review, Mr. Bennett emailed Ms. Candolfi and asked her to sign the Employee Review and send it back. She refused. She pointed to circumstances out of her control that made the Valuation Expo harder to market, but mostly challenged the requirement that she work at the office in person:
Upon acceptance of this position, it was understood and agreed upon that it was a full-time remote position and thus the reasoning during the salary negotiation process. I have gone into the office when necessary or when would benefit the company's initiatives. In addition, to the request of my presence in the office on Mondays. If it is now required of me to be in the office full time, I would like to re-evaluate my current agreement.
Mr. Bennett responded that Ms. Candolfi refused to sign the document She added in another email that the Employee Review
Ms. Candolfi followed up later in an email to Ms. Trice and Mr. Bennett that she thought the Employee Review was a "poor representation of my performance." She contended that several factors affected the marketing of the Valuation Expo, but again was most concerned about her remote status and requested clarification about whether she would be required in the office temporarily or permanently. She reiterated that she only accepted the job and salary because she understood she was in a remote position, adding that "[i]f the job requirements are now being restructured, I would like to request a reevaluation of my long-term agreement." She noted that
The Employee Manual, which Ms. Candolfi admitted receiving in her deposition, provided that remote work was permitted at the CEO's discretion:
(Emphasis added.) The Employee Manual section on "Corrective Action" provides a "progressive approach" to employee discipline:
The usual sequence of corrective actions includes an oral warning, a written warning, probation, and finally termination of employment. ... Though committed to a progressive approach to corrective action, Allterra ... considers certain rule infractions and violations of standards as grounds for immediate termination of employment.
The "rule infractions" include "insubordinate behavior," "disrespectful conduct," and "[u]nsatisfactory performance or conduct."
During her deposition, Ms. Candolfi agreed that promoting the Valuation Expo was a "basic function[ ]" of her job as Marketing Director. She acknowledged that the Employee Review was accurate when it stated that they "currently[ ] ha[d] the lowest rate of attendees in history for the Upcoming Chicago Val Expo." And she testified that she was willing to sign the Employee Review only "if there was clarification" about whether her coming into the office was "temporary or permanent." There never was any such clarification, though, and Allterra ultimately terminated her employment.
During discovery, Allterra learned that throughout her employment, Ms. Candolfi worked three other jobs. She operated a wedding planning business, walked dogs via a profile on Rover.com, and bartended nights and weekends at an area restaurant. She insisted that these activities did not conflict with her employment obligations to Allterra.
Ms. Candolfi sued Allterra for wrongful discharge and the case was set for trial on May 20, 2021. In its corresponding Scheduling Order, the court required all motions to be filed forty-five days prior to the trial date, April 5, 2021. The trial court's order also authorized discovery until March 20, 2021.
After the close of discovery, on March 24, Allterra moved to postpone the trial and convert the trial date to a hearing on its motion for summary judgment, which it filed the following day. On April 4, 2021, the trial court granted Allterra's motion to postpone the trial date. No new trial date was set, but the court ordered the parties to appear for a hearing on Allterra's summary judgment motion on May 20, 2021.
On May 11, 2021, Ms. Candolfi's counsel, Mr. West, filed a motion to continue the summary judgment hearing:
Because the trial date was postponed, Plaintiff's undersigned Counsel removed the May 20, 2021 trial date from his calendar. Shortly thereafter, and before Defendant's Request for a Motions Hearing, the undersigned Counsel agreed to attend a doctor appointment for his one year old son, which requires travel across the Chesapeake Bay bridge. ... At this point, rescheduling the doctor appointment could take six months or more, leaving our son without critical medical treatment if the tests scheduled for May 20th are delayed.
He...
To continue reading
Request your trial