Dukanci v. Ann Inc.

Decision Date03 August 2015
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 14–11282–DJC
Citation117 F.Supp.3d 115
Parties Esen Dukanci, Plaintiff, v. Ann Inc. Retail, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

Esen Dukanci, Chestnut Hill, MA, pro se.

Lisa Stephanian Burton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Boston, MA, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CASPER, J.

I. Introduction

Plaintiff Esen Dukanci ("Dukanci") has filed this lawsuit against Defendant Ann Taylor Retail Inc.1 ("Ann Taylor") alleging a claim of retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–3(a). D. 1. Ann Taylor has moved for summary judgment. D. 54.

For the reasons stated below, the Court ALLOWS the motion.

II. Standard of Review

The Court grants summary judgment where there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the undisputed facts demonstrate that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). "A fact is material if it carries with it the potential to affect the outcome of the suit under applicable law." Santiago–Ramos v. Centennial P.R. Wireless Corp., 217 F.3d 46, 52 (1st Cir.2000) (quoting Sánchez v. Alvarado 101 F.3d 223, 227 (1st Cir.1996) ). The movant bears the burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Carmona v. Toledo, 215 F.3d 124, 132 (1st Cir.2000) ; see Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). If the movant meets its burden, the non-moving party may not rest on the allegations or denials in her pleadings, Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 256, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986), but "must, with respect to each issue on which she would bear the burden of proof at trial, demonstrate that a trier of fact could reasonably resolve that issue in her favor." Borges ex rel. S.M.B.W. v. Serrano–Isern, 605 F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir.2010). "As a general rule, that requires the production of evidence that is ‘significant[ly] probative.’ " Id. (quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249, 106 S.Ct. 2505 ) (alteration in original). Here, then, Dukanci "must point to evidence in the record that would permit a rational factfinder to conclude that the employment action was retaliatory." Thompson v. Coca–Cola Co., 522 F.3d 168, 181 (1st Cir.2008). In determining whether to grant summary judgment, the Court "view[s] the record in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, drawing reasonable inferences in his favor." Noonan v. Staples, Inc., 556 F.3d 20, 25 (1st Cir.2009).

III. Factual Background

Unless otherwise indicated, the following facts are as described in Ann Taylor's statement of material facts, D. 56.2

Dukanci is Muslim, was born in Turkey and is a United States citizen. Id. ¶ 6. Dukanci worked for Ann Taylor for approximately five years from January 2007 until June 2012. Id. ¶¶ 7, 13. She began her employment with Ann Taylor as a senior assistant manager and comanager of the Ann Taylor LOFT store located in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, but was promoted to store manager in or around May 2009. Id. ¶¶ 8–9, 13. Prior to her termination on June 18, 2012, Dukanci was still employed as a store manager at the Chestnut Hill LOFT store. Id. ¶¶ 9, 13. As store manager, Dukanci was supervised by and reported directly to the district manager. Id. ¶ 12. Initially, Dukanci reported to District Manager Kellie Orcione ("Orcione"), but when Orcione left the company a few months later Dukanci began reporting to District Manger Michelle Desrosiers ("Desrosiers"). Id. Dukanci subsequently reported to District Manager Jeanne Anderson ("Anderson") after Desrosiers left in 2011.Id. Over the course of Dukanci's employment as store manager, Desrosiers and Anderson periodically reviewed Dukanci's performance and provided her with evaluations that identified consistent, specific areas of concern. Id. ¶¶ 14–15, 22–23, 32, 43–45.

A. Dukanci's Performance Issues Pre–MCAD Complaint

As noted above, Dukanci began her employment with Ann Taylor in January 2007 and was promoted to the position of store manager in May 2009. Id. ¶¶ 8–9. On March 25, 2010, Dukanci received her first annual performance assessment, which evaluated her 2009 performance as store manager. Id. ¶ 14. The assessment noted an overall performance rating of "below expectations" and placed Dukanci on notice that she must "improve her operational and directional leadership as well as her performance management skills immediately." Id. ¶¶ 15, 18. "[I]f immediate and sustained improvement of [Dukanci's] leadership is not evident[,] disciplinary action [would] follow." Id. ¶ 18. Dukanci acknowledges receiving the assessment and its contents. Id. ¶¶ 16, 17; Dukanci Depo., D. 56–1 at 18–22. In addition to the performance assessment, Dukanci received a final warning in December 2010 for losing her store keys. D. 56 ¶ 21; see also Dukanci Depo., D. 56–1 at 26–27.

On April 13, 2011, Dukanci received her second annual performance assessment, which evaluated her 2010 performance as store manager. D. 56 ¶ 22. Dukanci again received an overall performance rating of "below expectations" and Desrosiers, her evaluator, highlighted that Dukanci "continued to: (i) have a difficult time receiving constructive feedback; (ii) have a difficult time making decisions; (iii) fail to manage her co–manager's performance; (iv) fail to impact associate engagement or deliver effective written performance assessments; (v) fail to develop a talent pool for potential store leadership; (vi) fail operational assessments; (vii) fail to maintain the general maintenance of the Store; and (viii) use poor judgment." Id. ¶ 23. Dukanci acknowledges receiving the assessment and further acknowledges that she had been warned by Desrosiers that this was the second year in a row that Dukanci had failed to make improvements and "[i]f significant and sustained improvement of her leadership is not evident, further disciplinary action will follow up to and including the separation of her employment with LOFT." Id. ¶ 24; Dukanci Depo., D. 56–1 at 28–30.

On April 27, 2011, Dukanci sent an email to Human Resource Director Colleen Foote ("Foote") regarding the 2009 and 2010 performance assessments. D. 56 ¶ 26. In the email, Dukanci disagreed with both assessments, but did not express a belief that the negative evaluations therein came about as a result of her religion and/or national origin. Id. ¶ 28. Dukanci testified in her deposition, however, that she subsequently telephoned Foote, after receiving the 2010 performance assessment, to voice concerns about her belief that she was being discriminated against because of her religion. Id. ¶ 27; Dukanci Depo., D. 56–1 at 23–24.

In May 2011, an employee at Dukanci's store placed an anonymous call to C.A.R.E. (Concerned Associates Responsible for Ethics), a hotline maintained by Ann Taylor to which employees can submit complaints relating to the workplace environment. D. 56 ¶¶ 29, 30. The anonymous caller expressed concern about the actions taken by Dukanci after another employee was injured in the store. Id. ¶ 30. The caller reported that Dukanci showed "a lack of care" for the injured employee by not providing the employee with medical treatment in a timely manner.

Id. Dukanci acknowledges that the employee was injured in the store and further acknowledges that the hotline complaint had been submitted before she filed her March 2012 MCAD complaint. Id. ¶ 31; Dukanci Depo., D. 56–1 at 64–67.

In August 2011, Desrosiers issued Dukanci a mid–year performance assessment. D. 56 ¶ 32. In the assessment, Dukanci again received an overall performance rating of "below expectations." Id. The assessment noted that Dukanci "continues to deliver below expectations leadership performance," warning that "[a] lack of immediate, sustained improvement in [Dukanci's] performance will result in her separation from the company." Id. ¶ 33. Dukanci acknowledges that she received the mid-year performance assessment. Id. ¶ 34; Dukanci Depo., D. 56–1 at 33–35.

In late 2011, Desrosiers left Ann Taylor and was replaced by Anderson. D. 56 ¶ 36. According to Dukanci, Anderson "was very happy with [Dukanci's] performance up until [Anderson] found out that [Dukanci] was Muslim." Id. ¶ 37. In February 2012, another employee in Dukanci's store, Sales Lead Carey Dever ("Dever"), submitted a hotline complaint against Dukanci alleging that Dukanci "harassed her and retaliated against her regarding vacation time." Id. ¶¶ 38–39. Dever also complained about Dukanci's angry demeanor towards another store employee. Id. ¶ 39. Dever subsequently contacted Anderson, informing her that she would be resigning because of Dukanci's conduct. Id. ¶ 40. In an effort to resolve the situation, Anderson suggested that Dever speak to Dukanci, but Dever claims Dukanci refused to speak with her before leaving the store. Id. In addition to Dever, two other employees resigned from Dukanci's store in February. Id. ¶ 41. In her resignation letter, Dever explained that she "felt uncomfortable around [Dukanci]," but that she "regret [ted] that th[e] situation ha[d] gotten so bad." D. 57–2 at 2.

On February 15, 2012, Dukanci received her third annual performance assessment, which evaluated her 2011 performance as store manager. D. 56 ¶ 43. Unlike the two previous annual assessments, Dukanci received an overall performance rating of "meets expectations," but again received a "does not meet expectations" and "below expectations" for her strategic objectives. Id. ¶ 44. The assessment also informed Dukanci that her leadership and communication skills needed improvement. Id. Beginning in March 2012, Anderson met with Dukanci almost weekly to address Dukanci's performance. Id. ¶ 45. Anderson informed Dukanci of specific performance issues, including Dukanci's lack of leadership and that Dukanci's team felt as though she "did not inspire, show up with intent, or listen to them." Id. ¶ 46. In each assessment, Anderson also informed Dukanci that her failure to show improvement...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Grundy v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • February 10, 2020
    ...the law and legal argument are not properly a part of an LR. 56.1 statement of additional facts. See Dukanci v. Ann Inc. Retail, 117 F. Supp. 3d 115, 117 n.2 (D. Mass. 2015) ("proffered statements fail to comply with Local Rule 56.1 as they . . . consist largely of legal argument"); Matt v.......
  • Aecom Technical Servs. Inc. v. Mallinckrodt LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • August 3, 2015
  • Latimore v. Trotman
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • December 3, 2021
    ... ... timely opposition, a court may consider the motion unopposed ... or the opposition waived ... and allow the motion. NEPSK, Inc. v. Town of ... Houlton , 283 F.3d 1, 7-8 (1st Cir. 2002) (when party ... fails to file timely opposition, court may consider it ... Statements regarding the law or legal argument are also not ... properly a part of a LR. 56.1 statement of facts. See ... Dukanci v. Ann Inc. Retail , 117 F.Supp.3d 115, 117 n.2 ... (D. Mass. 2015) (statements of legal argument in nonmoving ... party's statement of ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT