Grande v. Hartford Bd. of Educ.
| Decision Date | 21 January 2021 |
| Docket Number | No. 3:19-cv-00184 (KAD),3:19-cv-00184 (KAD) |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut |
| Parties | JOHN GRANDE, Plaintiff, v. HARTFORD BOARD OF EDUCATION, JAY MIHALKO, CITY OF HARTFORD, Defendants. |
John Grande ("Grande" or the "Plaintiff") brings this action against the Hartford Board of Education (the "Board"), Jay Mihalko ("Mihalko"), and the City of Hartford (the "City," and, collectively, the "Defendants"). His claims arise out of his employment as a physical education teacher for the Hartford Public School District (the "District"). The Plaintiff alleges that he suffers from tinnitus and needs to wear headphones while working to protect against excessive noise. He alleges, inter alia, that the Defendants discriminated against him by creating a hostile work environment in the face of his disability and retaliated against him in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq (the "ADA").1
Defendants now move for summary judgment as to Plaintiff's remaining claims: discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation pursuant to the ADA against the Boardand the City (Counts Three, Four, and Seven); slander and libel against Mihalko (Count Nine); intentional infliction of emotional distress against the Board and the City (Count Ten); and a violation of the Plaintiff's civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Board and the City (Count Eleven). The Court has considered the Defendants' supporting memorandum (ECF No. 57-1) and exhibits, the Plaintiff's opposition (ECF No. 62-1) and exhibits, and the Defendants' reply brief (ECF No. 63) and exhibits. Oral argument was held on September 21, 2020. (ECF No. 66.) For the reasons that follow, Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
The following facts are drawn from the parties' Local Rule 56(a)(1) Statements of Undisputed Material Facts ("LRS") and from the exhibits in the record. The facts set forth in the Defendants' LRS (ECF No. 57-3) are admitted by the Plaintiff (ECF No. 62-2) unless otherwise indicated.
Grande began working as a physical education teacher for the District in 1989 and served at the Noah Webster MicroSociety Magnet School ("Noah Webster") from the 2008-2009 school year until his reassignment to Batchelder School at the start of the 2017-2018 school year. (Defs.' LRS ¶ 1.) Mihalko served as principal of Noah Webster from approximately 2013 through the fall of 2017. (Id. ¶ 2.) According to the Plaintiff, Mihalko's tenure as principal generated an atmosphere of intimidation at Noah Webster, with many teachers complaining about Mihalko's mistreatment. (Id. ¶¶ 3-5.)
Grande began wearing headphones for his tinnitus while on cafeteria duty during the 2015-2016 school year, at which time neither Mihalko nor any other administrator commented on the headphones. (Id. ¶ 12.) However on October 10, 2016, Mihalko met with Grande and asked whether he had a medical note supporting his need for ear protection. (Id. ¶ 13.) While Grandedid not specifically state that he had tinnitus, Grande told Mihalko that his "ears hurt, and they ring all the time." (Grande Dep. Tr. at 62:15-16, Defs.' Ex. 1, ECF No. 57-5.) According to Mihalko, he questioned Grande about the headphones because he was concerned that it created a safety issue if Grande was not able to hear students in the cafeteria and he thought the headphones might convey the message that Grande was not listening to them. (Defs.' LRS ¶ 15.) Grande interpreted Mihalko's conduct at the meeting as hostile. (Id. ¶ 16.) That evening, Grande sent Mihalko an email to memorialize their conversation in which he recalled that Mihalko told Grande that he would face disciplinary action if he continued to wear the headphones—a position that Grande informed Mihalko he interpreted as harassment. (See Oct. 10, 2016 Email, Defs.' Ex. 4, ECF No. 57-8.) Mihalko forwarded Grande's email to the District's Office of Talent Management. (Defs.' LRS ¶ 18.)
On October 11 and 12, 2016 Grande continued to wear his headphones at work. (Id. ¶ 19.) Grande claims that Richard Skowronski, Noah Webster's assistant principal ("Skowronski"), subsequently informed Grande he was not permitted to wear the headphones per Mihalko's directive, citing safety concerns. (Id.) On the evening of October 12, Grande sent Skowronski an email in which he thanked Skowronski for his professional demeanor in addressing the situation while indicating that he regretfully believed Skowronski might now be involved in a "potential workplace harassment / bullying claim against Mr. Mihalko," citing what Grande perceived to be Mihalko's "personal vendetta" against him. (October 12, 2016 Email, Defs.' Ex. 5, ECF No. 57-9.) Following this incident the District's Chief Labor and Legal Officer requested documentation from the Plaintiff regarding his medical condition and sent him the Board's harassment policy and complaint forms, but Grande did not provide medical documentation or complete a harassmentcomplaint, as he was no longer challenged about wearing his headphones.2 (Defs.' LRS ¶¶ 25-26.)
Plaintiff was ultimately never disciplined for wearing the headphones and while he admits that he was no longer told that he could not wear ear protection after October 12, 2016, he claims that he "continued to feel harassed by Mihalko after October 12th because he believed Mihalko took actions against him in retaliation for Plaintiff standing up for himself." .) Specifically, on October 20, 2016, Mihalko asked Grande to lower the volume of the music in the gym because it was bothering a kindergarten class across the hall, and Grande interpreted this request as mocking his need for ear protection. (Id. ¶ 31.) The parties dispute whether kindergarten staff actually complained about the music as Mihalko alleged. (See Defs.' LRS ¶ 33; Grande Decl. ¶ 20, ECF No. 62-3.) On October 26 and November 4, 2016, Mihalko again turned down the music in the gym, which Plaintiff likewise interpreted as mocking behavior. .) According to Grande, in ten years of playing music in the gym he had never received any complaints about its volume. (Id.) On November 23, 2016, Mihalko followed up with the Plaintiff by asking whether he had obtained a doctor's note for his medical condition. (Defs.' LRS ¶ 34.) According to the Plaintiff, he told Mihalko he had a doctor's note but Mihalko never asked Grande to submit it, and so the note was never provided to the Defendants. .)
Grande filed a complaint with the Connecticut Human Rights Commission ("CHRO") on February 2, 2017, which was served on February 16, 2017 on Julia Wilde, counsel for the Board. (Defs.' LRS ¶¶ 38-39.) Defendants represent that Mihalko first learned of the CHRO complainton March 23, 2017.3 (Id. ¶ 40.) In January 2017, Noah Webster's School Governance Committee ("SCG"), which is comprised of teachers, parents, and Mihalko, met to discuss the school's annual budget, at which time they explored the potential addition of a Media Specialist position. (Id. ¶¶ 43-44.) A subsequent survey sent by Mihalko revealed that approximately 86% of Noah Webster staff deemed it important to fill that position. (Id. ¶ 45.) On February 7, 2017 the SCG met again and recommended that the Media Specialist position be added and a physical education position be eliminated for the upcoming school year. (Id. ¶ 46.) While Defendants represent that the Media Specialist role was deemed an important position by Mihalko as well as by Hartford Public Schools Superintendent Kate Carbone ("Carbone") and Staffing Specialist Janet Serrano ("Serrano") (id. ¶¶ 48-49), Grande claims that Mihalko manufactured the need for a Media Specialist after having eliminated the position the year prior. (Grande Decl. ¶ 25a.) In order to accommodate the need for a Media Specialist, Mihalko, Carbone, and Serrano decided to remove one of the two physical education teacher positions at Noah Webster and ultimately retained Plaintiff's colleague, Nick Popolizzio, instead of the Plaintiff.4 (Defs.' LRS ¶¶ 50-52.)
Grande's job performance and evaluations were not factored into the decision to eliminate his position. (Id. ¶ 55.) Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement between the Board and the Hartford Federation of Teachers, Grande can be reassigned to any school within the District so long as he remains in the physical education program, and Grande acknowledges that both he and teachers in other subject areas have previously been moved to different schools within theirprograms. (Id. ¶¶ 56, 58, 60.) Grande's job duties and salary as a physical education teacher remain the same no matter what school he is assigned to. (Id. ¶ 59.)
On February 24, 2017, Mihalko met with the Plaintiff as a courtesy to inform him that his position at Noah Webster was being eliminated for the upcoming school year. (Id. ¶¶ 62-63.) Grande recorded this meeting without Mihalko's knowledge and has included a copy of the audio recording in the summary judgment record. (See Grande Decl. Ex. G.) While Defendants claim that "Plaintiff engaged in threatening, intimidating, and unprofessional behavior toward Mihalko" at the February 24 meeting (Defs.' LRS ¶ 66), Grande asserts that these are false accusations. (Grande Decl. ¶ 25(d).) On February 26, 2017, Grande sent Mihalko an email in which he stated that he considered the February 24 meeting to constitute a continuation of the workplace harassment that had begun in October 2016. (Feb. 26, 2017 Email, Defs.' Ex. 9, ECF No. 57-13.)
On March 1, 2017, Plaintiff was again provided a harassment complaint form by the Board but he did not complete it, as by that time he had already submitted his complaint to the CHRO. .) On ...
To continue reading
Request your trial