Clement v. Satterfield

• Decision Date: 28 February 2013
• Docket Number: Case No. 4:12–cv–00012.
• Parties: Sherwood CLEMENT and Chandler Hughes, Plaintiffs, v. Ray SATTERFIELD, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia

927 F.Supp.2d 297

Sherwood CLEMENT and Chandler Hughes, Plaintiffs,

v.Ray SATTERFIELD, Defendant.

Case No. 4:12–cv–00012.

United States District Court,

W.D. Virginia.

Danville Division.

Feb. 28, 2013.

Melvin E. Williams, Mel Williams PLC, Roanoke, VA, for Plaintiffs.

Amanda M. Morgan, Glenn Walthall Pulley, Clement & Wheatley PC, Danville, VA, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

JACKSON L. KISER, Senior District Judge.

Before me is Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 23], which was filed on January 11, 2013. Plaintiffs filed a timely Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion [ECF No. 28] on January 25, 2013, and Defendants followed by filing their Reply [ECF No. 29] on February 1, 2013. On February 5, 2012, I heard oral argument from both sides outlining their respective positions on the law, the facts, and the nature and extent of the record. At oral argument, I granted Plaintiffs' request to file additional briefings in this case, which Plaintiffs filed on February 15, 2013 [ECF No. 32]. Defendant responded on February 19, 2013 [ECF No. 33]. Having thoroughly reviewed the briefs, the record, and the arguments of counsel, the matter is now ripe for decision. For the reasons stated below, I GRANT Defendant's Motion in part, and DENY Defendant's Motion in part.

STATEMENT OF FACTS¹

This case arises from the alleged discrimination of Sherwood Clement (“Clement”), and the alleged discrimination of, and subsequent retaliation against Chandler Hughes (“Hughes”), collectively “Plaintiffs,” by Ray Satterfield (“Defendant”). Clement, an African–American male who suffered a stroke several years ago, alleges that he was denied the opportunity to become a vendor at the South Boston farmer's market on account of his race and his disability. Hughes, also an African–American, alleges that he was removed from his position as Vice President of the Halifax County Farmer's Market Association and removed as a vendor because of his race and because he complained about the discriminatory treatment of Clement. Plaintiffs allege that the discriminatory decisions were made by Defendant, the then-and-current President of the Halifax County Farmers Market Association (“the Association”).

1. The Halifax County Farmer's Market Association

The Association is an unincorporated private organization comprised of vendors in Halifax County, Virginia. During 2010, the Association maintained two marketplaces, one located in South Boston, Virginia and one in Halifax, Virginia. ( See Satterfield Dep. 24:8–9; 30:1–32:1, Nov. 15, 2012.) Currently, the Association only operates the South Boston marketplace. ( See id.) At all times relevant hereto, the Association was governed by its own Bylaws, which set forth the Association's mission to “engage in retail marketing activities for producers of farm and home products.” (Def.'s Br. in Supp. in of Mt. for Summ. J. (“Def.'s Br.”) [ECF No. 24.], Ex. 4.) The Association is funded solely by vendor permit fees, and it has never received direct public funding or subsidies. ( See Def.'s Br., Ex. 7.)

The Association maintains the South Boston Marketplace on property that it leases from the town of South Boston. ( See id.) The property consists of a parking lot and two shelters, which the town built from a grant from the Virginia Tobacco Indemnification and Community Revitalization Commission. ( See id.) In 2008, South Boston used funding from the United States Department of Agriculture and local funds to purchase several display tables, compost bins, other kitchen items, and a refrigeration unit for the marketplace, all of which the town still owns. ( See id.)

In order to become a vendor at the farmer's market, the Association's Bylaws require interested individuals to submit an application and pay a membership fee. ( See Def.'s Br., Ex. 4.) At all relevant times, the application stated that, “ If you do not raise produce then you cannot be a producer/vendor and sell produce at any Halifax County Farmers' Market Association Markets.” (emphasis in original). ( See Def.'s Br., Ex. 8.) Thus, all interested vendors must be “bone fide producer[s] of farm and home products.” ( Id.) During the relevant period, interested vendors could obtain applications from Defendant or Hughes, then-acting President and Vice President, respectively. ( See Satterfield Dep. 51:1–52:4; Hughes Dep. 37:22–39:25, Nov. 15, 2012.)

2. Alleged Discrimination Against Clement

Taking the evidence in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, it appears that Clement first called Defendant in early 2010 to inquire about becoming a vendor at the South Boston marketplace. ( See Clement Dep. 25:13–16, Nov. 15, 2012.) Defendant advised Clement that he would need to raise his own produce to be eligible to join the Association. ( See id. at 30–2–33:25.) Defendant then instructed Clement to call him once Clement had planted his produce.² ( See id.) Following their exchange, Clement proceeded to plant his garden and then attempted to contact Defendant. ( See id.) According to the Complaint, Clement tried to call Defendant several times but was unable to reach him. ( See Compl. ¶ 12.) At his deposition, Clement testified that he tried to call Defendant two times a week for several months, which Hughes confirmed at his deposition. ( See Hughes Dep. 40:12–21) (“[Clement] had told me he had tried to start calling [Defendant] from January right on up until late June ... and he couldn't get in touch, [Defendant] never returned his call, [Clement] couldn't get in touch but that one time when [Defendant] left it on the answer machine.”) After Clement could not reach Defendant, Clement went to the farmer's market to speak with Defendant in person, but Defendant was not there.³ ( See Clement Dep. 38:1–39:24; Hughes Dep. 50:1–15.) Clement even reached out to Tamara Vest, a representative for Destination South Boston, to help resolve the situation; however, Vest told Clement “to go back to [Defendant].” (Clement Dep. 38:1–39:24.)

In July 2010, Clement mentioned to Hughes, who was the acting Vice President of the Association, that Defendant was refusing to provide Clement with an application to join the Association. ( See Clement Dep. 45:11–25) As a result, Hughes approached Defendant to discuss Clement's interest in becoming a vendor. ( See Hughes Dep. 46:13–15.) During their conversation, Defendant acknowledged that he was aware of Clement's interest in becoming a vendor, but he provided a racially derogatory explanation for the situation. ( See id. at 26:2–27:20) Specifically, Defendant responded that he “didn't want too many [black people or n*ggers] there.” ⁴ ( See id. at 27:6–10) Hughes opined that, “I don't take it that he was talking about customers ... he was talking about [sic] didn't want too many black vendors” at the farmers market. ( Id. at 31:4–7.) Furthermore, Hughes testified that the comment was made at the farmer's market and within the context of their conversation about Clement. ( See id. at 28:4–32:8.)

When Clement did not hear from Defendant, Clement submitted several letters to the editors of various local newspapers to draw attention to the situation, which were published on October 27, 2010, November 14, 2010, and December 8, 2010. ( See Def.'s Br., Ex. 12.) In these letters, Clement claimed that he was denied a permit from the Association because of his physical disability. ( See id.) According to the Complaint, Clement had a stroke several years ago, which has left him with paralysis to his left arm and leg and has left him with observable speaking difficulties. ( See Compl. ¶ 4.) Clement's letters raised concerns from other members of the Association. At the Association's end-of-year meeting for 2010, Defendant was questioned by another member about Clement's letters to the editor. ( See Satterfield Dep. 146:5–14.) In response to these inquiries, Defendant stated, in an open meeting in front of the entire membership, “[w]ell, [Plaintiff] can't even go to the grocery store by hisself,” implying that Clement was too disabled to receive a permit. ( Id.) Defendant later clarified that he did not issue a permit to Clement because Clement had not filled out an application and because Clement had not planted any produce—two requirements to join the Association. ( See id.)

3. Alleged Discrimination against Hughes

Sometime after Hughes approached Defendant to talk about Clement's interest in joining the Association, Hughes was removed from his position in the Association.⁵ According to Defendant, Defendant received several complaints from female members of the Association on July 10, 2010, claiming that Hughes was sexually harassing them. ( See Satterfield Dep. 67:8–79:9.) Defendant, along with William McCaleb, a representative of Virginia Cooperative Extension for Halifax County, interviewed these women regarding the allegations, and the women prepared written summaries. ( See id.) After speaking with the complainants, Defendant called an impromptu board meeting to discuss the allegations, which was attended by the two remaining voting members of the Board: Brenda Watts, Secretary, and Elizabeth Cole, Treasurer. ( See id. at 79:12–24.) Defendant convened the meeting the same day that he heard the allegations, and Defendant did not give advanced notice of the meeting to anyone, including Hughes. ( See id.) At the meeting, the three Board members conferred and voted to remove Hughes from the Association due to his inappropriate behavior. ( See id.) On July 13, 2010, however, Carl Espy, ex-officio member of the Association, urged Defendant to hold another meeting so that Defendant could provide proper notice to all parties prior to rendering a decision. ( See Pl.'s Resp. in Opp. to Def.'s Mt. for Summ. J., (“Pl.'s Resp.”) [ECF No. 24], Ex. 4.) Linda Wallace, another ex-officio board member, also expressed concerns about the meeting. ( See Pl.'s Resp., Ex. 5.) In an email to Defendant, Ms. Wallace noted that she was worried...