Garcimonde-Fisher v. Area203 Mktg., LLC, 1:13–CV–422.

Citation105 F.Supp.3d 825
Decision Date27 April 2015
Docket NumberNo. 1:13–CV–422.,1:13–CV–422.
PartiesLauren GARCIMONDE–FISHER, Jeffrey L. Harris, Jeffrey L. Cole, Plaintiffs, v. AREA203 MARKETING, LLC, Defendant.
CourtUnited States District Courts. 6th Circuit. Eastern District of Tennessee

Neil L. Henrichsen, Henrichsen Siegel, PLLC, Jacksonville, FL, Jennifer B. Morton, Law Office of Jennifer B. Morton, Knoxville, TN, for Plaintiffs.

Oscar John Norris, III, Jackson Lewis LLP, Memphis, TN, Adriana Midence Scott, Robert W. Capobiaco, Jackson Lewis PC, Atlanta, GA, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM

CURTIS L. COLLIER, District Judge.

Before the Court is Defendant Area203 Marketing's (Defendant) motion for summary judgment (Court File No. 36). Plaintiffs Lauren Garcimonde–Fisher (Plaintiff Garcimonde–Fisher), Jeffrey L. Harris (Plaintiff Harris), and Jeffrey L. Cole (Plaintiff Cole) (collectively Plaintiffs) responded (Court File No. 39) and Defendant replied (Court File No. 40). For the reasons set forth below, the Court will GRANT IN PARTand DENY IN PARTthe Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Court File No. 36).

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Defendant Area203 Marketing is a marketing company owned by Carey Brown (“Brown”) which was originally formed to provide marketing services for Brown's payday lending businesses and other affiliated businesses. Prior to November 2009, it was known as Logic Marketing. Brown is a practitioner of evangelical Protestantism and was, at the time of these events, a Southern Baptist. James Cole helped Brown run some of his companies and served a human resources role for the management team of Area203. Ron Beaver was brought into the Area203 management team as Chief Operating Officer after Plaintiff Cole was terminated.

Brown believed his businesses should reflect his values. The offices of Area203 were saturated with religious, particularly Evangelical Christian, imagery. The walls were decorated with Judeo–Christian artwork and biblical posters, and placards of the Ten Commandments graced rooms throughout the office. Materials with religious messages and solicitations for donations to overtly religious charities were distributed to employees. The break room had a TV that looped Christian movies all day long. Religious charities were invited to give presentations employees were required to attend and allowed to solicit donations from employees. For part of the time Plaintiffs were employed at Area203, Area203 kept a chaplain on staff, R.C. Reynolds, who hosted prayer meetings and bible studies scheduled during work.1

R.C. Reynolds' tenure at Area203 is the subject of some controversy. Both parties agree he did tell employees his Bible studies were mandatory, he aggressively promoted his religion in the workplace (e.g. he told employees the King James Version was the “correct” version of the Bible), and he told employees Brown himself had stated attendance was required. But Area203 claims Reynolds was not acting in accord with Brown's wishes and asserts Brown took action against Reynolds; first by sending James Cole to tell him to stop and then—when he refused to do so—removing him from the premises. It is also unclear whether Reynolds was actually on Area203's payroll or whether Area203 merely made donations to Reynolds' charity. Brown does admit he never sent any message to his employees clarifying that the prayer meetings and bible studies were not required.

Brown himself was accused of making derogatory comments regarding faiths other than his particular brand of Christianity. In the presence of Plaintiff Jeff Cole, a Catholic, he stated the King James version of the Bible was the “correct” version of the Bible (Pl. Cole Dep. 199). He also stated that a Catholic was not the “right kind of Christian” to Plaintiff Garcimonde–Fisher, also a Catholic (Garcimonde–Fisher Dep. 225). Brown was openly defiant about the extent to which he brought religion into the workplace. At a February 2010 meeting with employment counsel and several members of Area203's senior management team, in the wake of Plaintiff Jeff Cole's termination and subsequent EEOC complaint, Brown stated those who find the religious materials decorating the walls discriminatory can just quit. Defendant disputes whether these events occurred.

Plaintiffs allege these religious predilections extended to Area203's clients. In September 2008, Plaintiffs Garcimonde–Fisher and Cole met with a client of Area203, Naomi Crain. During the meeting she emphasized her close relationship with Brown and implied that she could have someone terminated if they were not the right kind of Christian. She and Brown both commented to Plaintiff Garcimonde–Fisher that a Catholic was not the “right kind” of Christian (Garcimonde–Fisher Dep. 225).2And, after a meeting, she requested one Area203 employee—a person she described as a “good Christian”—be the only one to remain on her account stating that no one else aligned with her goals.

Each year, Area203 hosted a Christmas Party for its employees. In 2008, James Cole opened the Christmas party with a sermon focusing on the ongoing battle against evil, abortion, and homosexuals (Pl. Cole Dep. 134; Garcimonde–Fisher Dep. 120). At the 2009 Christmas party, Brown opened the event by introducing Ron Beaver (the new Chief Operating Officer who had partially replaced Plaintiff Cole) as someone who is a good Christian aligned with his faith and beliefs (Harris Dep. 163). At that same party, the employees were given gifts: a book about family, a book about abortion, and a “Horton Hears a Who” DVD (to demonstrate the importance of even the smallest things) (Harris Dep. 164).

In 2009, Area203 also hosted a “family fun day” for its employees at Fort Bluff Camp. Employees were required to attend a twenty-minute religious service in a chapel and sit through an additional thirty-minute religious presentation by Compassion International, an evangelical charity (Garcimonde–Fisher Dep. 124–26). At the end of this presentation, Compassion International solicited donations from the employees to support their work (id.)

Plaintiff Jeffrey Cole was hired as President of Area203 in November 2008. He reported directly to James Cole, who reported directly to Carey Brown. Plaintiff Cole alleges he reported both his and his subordinate's objections to the required religious events during his tenure at Area203. Plaintiff Cole submitted an expense report for mileage in late June 2009. Brown reviewed the reimbursement request and determined it to be false. Brown had traveled with Plaintiff Cole and knew Plaintiff Cole had rented a car rather than driving his own and was therefore ineligible to receive compensation for the mileage on the rental car. Plaintiff Cole was terminated in July 2009. After his termination, Brown told a newly hired Area203 employee Brown had terminated Plaintiff Cole because he was not the right kind of Christian.

Plaintiff Jeff Harris was hired in June 2009 as creative director and later partially replaced Plaintiff Cole as interim President. Plaintiff Harris was approached by Reynolds on several occasions inquiring why he was not in the bible studies. Plaintiff Harris also recalled a meeting with Naomi Crain where he was told that she wants “good Christians” for her work and that Plaintiff Harris, as a Catholic, does not read the “right” Bible. At the late February 2010 meeting with the company lawyer referenced above, Plaintiff Harris was singled out for his religion. It was in partial response to Plaintiff Harris' comments that Brown stated that if anyone did not like the religious material in the office, he could quit.

Plaintiff Lauren Garcimonde–Fisher was hired in March 2008 as a designer. In October 2008, Plaintiff Garcimonde–Fisher was promoted to director of interactive services and in April 2009 she was promoted to Vice President of Operations. After being required to attend the 2009 Christmas party, the family fun day, and other religious events, she complained to her supervisors, Plaintiffs Cole and Harris, who relayed her objections up the chain. She also objected to being required to attend events where religious charities solicited donations from, Area203 employees. She felt her attendance at these and other religious events were monitored by Brown, Beaver and James Cole.

Plaintiffs Harris and Garcimonde–Fisher hired Garcimonde–Fisher's husband, Jono Fisher for a photo shoot. They submitted two invoices for the project, both under $1000, but that Ron Beaver thought violated his policy that any expenditure over $1000 be pre-approved because they should have been submitted as one invoice. The parties dispute whether this actually violated the policy. Defendant asserts that this and other performance related problems resulted in the terminations of Plaintiffs Harris and Garcimonde–Fisher.

Plaintiffs filed this action in 2013 alleging a religiously hostile work environment, religious discrimination, and retaliation for their objections.

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Summary judgment is proper when “the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The moving party bears the burden of demonstrating no genuine issue of material fact exists. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Leary v. Daeschner,349 F.3d 888, 897 (6th Cir.2003). The Court should view the evidence, including all reasonable inferences, in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp.,475 U.S. 574, 587, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986); Nat'l Satellite Sports, Inc. v. Eliadis Inc.,253 F.3d 900, 907 (6th Cir.2001).

To survive a motion for summary judgment, “the non-moving party must go beyond the pleadings and come forward with specific facts to demonstrate that there is a genuine issue for trial.” Chao v. Hall Holding Co., Inc.,285 F.3d 415, 424 (6th Cir.2002). Indeed, a [plaintiff] is not entitled to a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Thomas v. FTS USA, LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia
    • 30 Junio 2016
    ...Chapter 7 bankruptcy." Sherman v. Wal–Mart Assoc., Inc., 550 B.R. 105, 109 (N.D.Tex.2016) ; see also Garcimonde–Fisher v. Area203 Marketing, LLC, 105 F.Supp.3d 825, 835 (E.D.Tenn.2015) ; Smith v. Scales Express, Inc., 2006 WL 2190575 (S.D.Ala. Aug. 2, 2006). Those courts found that the debt......
  • Benitez v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Tennessee
    • 5 Enero 2022
    ... ... period applies. EEOC v. Dolgencorp, LLC , 196 ... F.Supp.3d 783, 799 (E.D. Tenn. 2016), ... liable.” Garcimonde-Fisher v. Area203 Mktg., ... LLC , 105 F.Supp.3d 825, 837 ... ...
  • Benitez v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Tennessee
    • 28 Abril 2022
    ... ... period applies. EEOC v. Dolgencorp, LLC , 196 ... F.Supp.3d 783, 799 (E.D. Tenn. 2016), ... liable.” Garcimonde-Fisher v. Area203 Mktg., ... LLC , 105 F.Supp.3d 825, 837 ... ...
  • Ryan v. McDonald
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio
    • 13 Junio 2016
    ...– Fisher v. Area203 Mktg., LLC , even though they failed to include a retaliation claim in their official EEOC complaint. 105 F.Supp.3d 825, 835–836 (E.D.Tenn.2015). Plaintiffs claimed they were retaliated against by their employer for refusing to participate in mandatory religious events. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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