Green v. City of Northport

• Decision Date: 31 March 2014
• Docket Number: CASE NO. 7:11-CV-2354-SLB
• Parties: ROBERT W. GREEN, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF NORTHPORT; SCOTT COLLINS, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama

ROBERT W. GREEN, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF NORTHPORT; SCOTT COLLINS, Defendants.

CASE NO. 7:11-CV-2354-SLB

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA WESTERN DIVISION

March 31, 2014

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This case is presently pending before the court on defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 18.)¹ Plaintiff Robert W. Green has sued his former employer, City of Northport, and Northport's City Administrator, Scott Collins, alleging that defendants discriminated against him on the basis of his race and that they retaliated against him for complaining about discrimination in violation of Title VII and section 1981. Upon consideration of the record, the submissions of the parties, the arguments of counsel, and the relevant law, the court is of the opinion that defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, (doc. 18), is due to be granted.

I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 56(a), summary judgment is appropriate "if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled tojudgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); Clark v. Coats & Clark, Inc., 929 F.2d 604, 608 (11th Cir. 1991); see Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970). Once the moving party has met its burden, the non-moving party must go beyond the pleadings and show that there is a genuine issue of fact for trial. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324 (1986). A dispute is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).

A party asserting that a fact cannot be or is genuinely disputed must support the assertion by:

(A) citing to particular parts of materials in the record, including depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits or declarations, stipulations (including those made for purposes of the motion only), admissions, interrogatory answers, or other materials; or

(B) showing that the materials cited do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1); see also Clark, 929 F.2d at 608 ("it is never enough simply to state that the non-moving party cannot meet its burden at trial").

In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court's function is not to "weigh the evidence and determine the truth of the matter but to determine whether there is a genuine issue for trial." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249. "[C]ourts are required to view the facts and draw reasonable inferences 'in the light most favorable to the party opposing the [summary judgment] motion.'" Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 378 (2007)(quoting United States v.Diebold, Inc., 369 U.S. 654, 655 (1962)(per curiam)). Nevertheless, the non-moving party "need not be given the benefit of every inference but only of every reasonable inference." Graham v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 193 F.3d 1274, 1282 (11th Cir. 1999)(citing Brown v. City of Clewiston, 848 F.2d 1534, 1540 n.12 (11th Cir. 1988)); see also Scott, 550 U.S. at 380 ("When opposing parties tell two different stories, one of which is blatantly contradicted by the record, so that no reasonable jury could believe it, a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment.").

II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

Plaintiff Robert Green was hired by defendant City of Northport as its Chief of Police on April 17, 2006. (Doc. 19-1 at 27.) The Chief of Police is responsible for the organization and efficient operation of the Northport Police Department. (Id. at 164.)

At the time he was hired, Green acknowledged receipt of the City's Anti-Harassment Policy, effective March 9, 2001. (Doc. 19-1, Def. Exh. 9, at 271.) At the same time, he acknowledged that he had "New Employee Orientation," during which the anti-harassment policy was explained. (Id.) According to the City's policy, "Harassment consists of unwelcome conduct whether verbal, physical, or visual." (Doc. 19-1, Def. Exh. 9, at 272.) The procedures established for reporting harassment are set forth in the policy as follows:

Any employee who feels that he/she has been subjected to any form of unlawful harassment can report the facts to any supervisor or manager. If for any reason an employee does not feel comfortable reporting the facts to his/her supervisor, then the employee may report the facts to the Human Resources Director or City Administrator. . . . There will be no retaliation against anyone for reporting discrimination or harassment, or for cooperatingwith an investigation of a complaint of discrimination or harassment. No employee will be disciplined or penalized in any way for reporting any act of harassment or for making a complaint, unless the investigation clearly shows that the report or complaint is false and was made for the purpose [of] damaging the reputation of a fellow employee.

(Id. at 273 [emphasis added].) The City's Personnel Policies and Procedures apply to all police department employees. (Doc. 19-3, Exh. 5, at 229.)

Defendant Scott Collins, Northport's City Administrator, began work on December 15, 2008.² (Doc. 19-7 at 56.) As City Administrator, Collins had overall responsibility for the financial and day-to-day operations of Northport. (Doc. 19-7 at 52; doc. 19-1 at 365.) All department heads, including Green, reported directly to Collins. (Doc. 19-1 at 88; doc. 19-7 at 52.)

On January 6, 2009, Collins came to Green and stated he had two complaints, one from Mayor Bobby Herndon about Green allegedly using a curse word at a speaking engagement and a second about Green driving a BMW that had been confiscated by the Police Department. (Doc. 19-1 at 71-74.) Green testified that he felt harassed by Collinsbecause he had "never received any complaints of any kind and on his second day on the job³ as City Administrator he [had come] to me with two complaints. (Id. at 79.)

Green testified "there is a possibility" that Herndon made up his complaint about plaintiff's use of a curse word in public because, with the change in city administration, Herndon may have wanted a new Chief of Police. (Id. at 100.) According to Green, approximately one week after he was elected, Herndon had said to said Green, "[']Chief, you are the exact person I want to see.['] He said, ['H]ave you heard that I am a member of the Ku Klux Klan?[']" (Id. at 99.) Green said, "No," and Herndon then asked, "Do you think that I am a member of the KKK," to which plaintiff replied, "I don't know; that's what I have heard." (Id.)

Green was driving a BMW that had been confiscated in a drug raid. (Doc. 19-7 at 352.) On January 6, 2009, Collins told Green not to drive the BMW to conferences or "home." (Doc. 19-1 at 89, 92.) He lived in an apartment in Northport during the week and he drove the BMW to his Northport apartment. (Id. at 87, 92.) Green testified that he interpreted Collins's instructions as telling him not to drive the BMW to his home in Selma. (Id. at 86-87.) He continued to drive the BMW to his Northport apartment.

On May 20, 2009, Collins sent Green an email on May 20, 2009, regarding Green's driving of the BMW; this email stated:

In the January 6th discussion I reported to you some complaints I received regarding your use of the BMW. I asked you not to drive the BMW home and to instead drive your assigned Crown Victoria Police Vehicle. It is my understanding that you drove the BMW home last night, which prompted today's email. Did you or did you not leave your assigned Crown Victoria at Police Headquarters last night, drive the BMW home and arrive at work at approximately 8:30 a.m. this morning?

(Doc. 22-1 at 2.) Green responded, "I was under the impression that you did not want me to drive the BMW to Selma. I always drive the BMW to my apartment in Northport." (Id.) Thereafter, Collins took the BMW and gave it to the West Alabama narcotics squad. (Doc. 19-7 at 354.)

Collins sent a memorandum to all department heads on February 25, 2009, informing them that all final personnel decisions, including discipline, were to be made by him. (Doc. 22-17 at 2.) He testified that, as City Administrator, he had the authority to correct any action of a department heads that violated City policy. (Doc. 19-7 at 211-12.)

On March 20, 2009, Collins sent an email to all department heads, asking for all employees' time sheets. (Doc. 19-8, Pl. Exh. 48, at 7.) He also told the department heads, "[B]eginning next pay period I will need to review and sign all department head time sheets and leave requests." (Id.) Green responded:

Do you really want the time sheets of all employees? Perhaps you should confer with Beretta because even though there is a variation in time sheets between departments, all departments submit a final standardized time sheet to payroll. Additionally, requiring department heads to submit an absence request to you on every absence is akin to treating a department head like an employee at the bottom of his respective department instead of one at the top. Department heads in most agencies only have to submit absence requests if the absence will be for an extended period [of] time, such as a week or longer. Iam sure that all department heads will comply with your request, but know this, [during] the sixteen years that I have serve[d] as chief, seeking approval of a mayor, city manager, or city administrator for a short absence has never been a requirement.

(Id.)

Collins sent Green a reply, which stated that he was trying to get "some uniformity" in the payroll process. (Id.) He also stated, "All department heads, including me, have to submit a time sheet including all time off taken. And know this, regardless of what has been done at other agencies this is the process that all of us will follow." (Id.)

In his deposition, Green testified to a number of actions taken by Collins. Green testified that Collins...