Grigsby v. North Mississippi Medical Center, Inc.

Decision Date15 December 1978
Docket NumberNo. 76-2207,76-2207
Citation586 F.2d 457
Parties18 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1225, 18 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 8731 Otha GRIGSBY et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NORTH MISSISSIPPI MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Kenneth Mayfield, Tupelo, Miss., Melvyn R. Leventhal, Jack Greenberg, Clyde E. Murphy, New York City, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Guy Mitchell, Jr., Thomas D. Murry, Tupelo, Miss., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi.

Before COLEMAN, CLARK and RUBIN, Circuit Judges.

CHARLES CLARK, Circuit Judge:

This case challenges employment practices at North Mississippi Medical Center (Medical Center), a facility consisting of a hospital in Tupelo of over 400 beds, a mental health complex in Tupelo, and a 50-bed satellite unit in Baldwyn. The suit was initiated in 1974 by Otha Grigsby seeking individual and class relief from racial discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1981 and 1983 and the thirteenth amendment to the United States Constitution. Subsequently, Eular Young, Eddie Black, and Essie Sneed intervened, asserting alleged violations of their civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1981. The intervention by Eddie Black also invoked jurisdiction under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e Et seq. 1

Prior to certification of the class, however, the district court, on motion by defendant, limited plaintiffs' discovery interrogatories to those concerning employment practices of the mental health complex and the satellite unit, the only units in which the named plaintiffs were employed. At that time it specifically reserved determination of the membership or extent of the class. No class was certified until the first day of trial. The class then certified was not limited to the two units named, but was certified under F.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(2) on behalf of:

All present, discharged, laid off, and future black employees of defendant who have been or may in the future be affected by any policy or practice of defendant of racial discrimination in the areas of initial job assignment, promotions, job classification, employee disciplinary actions and termination of employment. 2

The district court found that the evidence presented by Grigsby, Black, Young, and Sneed was sufficient to make out a prima facie case of discrimination on their individual civil rights claims, but concluded that the defendant satisfied its burden of coming forward with legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for terminating Grigsby, Young, and Sneed and for not promoting Black. Furthermore, the court rejected Black's Title VII claim. As to the class, the court determined that no prima facie case had been established; therefore, the burden never shifted to defendant. The instant appeal is by Otha Grigsby, Essie Sneed, Eddie Black, individually, and on behalf of the certified class. 3 They challenge the court's limitation of discovery and its conclusions regarding the individual and class claims. Because the trial court's findings as to the individual claims are not clearly erroneous, we affirm. For the reasons stated below, we remand the class issue with directions.

At the time of trial, the Medical Center employed approximately 1,120 persons, of whom 814 (73%) were white and 306 (27%) were black, in an area with a 21% Black population. At trial, plaintiffs and defendants both submitted statistical evidence of the racial composition of the various personnel categories in these two units. Generally, executive and supervisory positions were occupied by whites, whereas blacks to a great extent staffed the housekeeping and dietary departments. Other evidence indicated that the Medical Center had no facially discriminatory hiring practice, seniority system, or transfer policy, and that it provided a continuing education program equally available to all employees.

Plaintiff Otha Grigsby, whose educational background included a master's degree in sociology and anthropology, was employed as an Occupational Health Specialist in the mental health complex of the Medical Center in August 1973. He was responsible for soliciting employer participation in a newly created program designed to assist employers in recognizing alcohol or other drug-related problems of employees and to encourage referral of those employees to the mental health complex for appropriate treatment. After working with the program for more than eight months, Grigsby had not succeeded in securing a single signed employer commitment, and the Director of the mental health complex issued an ultimatum stating that he would be terminated if he could not get results within 30 days. Grigsby was unable to produce an agreement within that time. Additional factors also led to the Director's decision to terminate Grigsby. He had received negative reactions from employers, who expressed lack of confidence in Grigsby's ability to handle employee problems. Furthermore, he determined that the program itself required a more clinical approach. Thereafter Grigsby was given notice of his termination and was "laid off" in August 1974 despite his last-minute production of several contracts. Grigsby's failure to obtain earlier results cannot totally be attributed to his inadequacy. The program was an innovation, which as first drafted required a fee commitment, and needed time to earn acceptance in the community. However, Grigsby's replacement, a white with practical clinical training and a master's degree in community counselling, secured approximately 16 agreements from employers in his first year with the program.

Eddie Black was employed in June 1972 as manager-counselor at an alcoholic outreach center under the supervision of two white coordinators. These supervisors were responsible for coordinating services provided in the counties, supervising and training field personnel, and conducting group therapy sessions. When one of the coordinators resigned, a decision was made among the directors of the program to look outside the mental health complex for candidates since they felt that no current employee, including Black, was qualified for the position. Shortly after a replacement with supervisory and counseling experience was hired, Black was promoted to a level just below coordinator-supervisor, filling a vacancy brought about by a white's discharge for inadequate performance. Black accepted the promotion but resigned in less than two months in a "fit of pique" for having been denied the supervisor's position.

Essie Sneed injured her back while lifting a bed patient during her initial 90-day probationary employment as nurse's aide. Although the Medical Center does not normally terminate employees for absences necessitated by on-the-job injuries, it discharged her before the end of her three-month probation for excessive absenteeism. Sneed, however, failed to report to work or call in for more than a week after she had been released by her physician to return to work.

At the outset, we disagree with plaintiffs' contention that discovery was improperly limited by the district court. Plaintiffs attribute their inability to make a prima facie showing of class discrimination to the court's limitation of their second interrogatory request. However, at the time of its order the court had not yet decided on the broad class certification. Thus it then acted well within its discretion in circumscribing plaintiffs' request to prevent an undue burden on defendants. Plaintiffs engaged in no further discovery other than the submission of revised interrogatories conforming with that order. They at no time challenged the order, nor did they seek its revision once the class was certified to include the entire Medical Center. While it is true that class certification...

To continue reading

Request your trial
59 cases
  • Womack v. Shell Chemical Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama
    • May 18, 1981
    ...held that to prevail under Section 1981 a plaintiff must prove discriminatory purpose.") (footnote omitted); Grigsby v. North Miss. Med. Center, Inc., 586 F.2d 457 (5th Cir. 1978); William v. DeKalb County, 577 F.2d 248 (5th Cir. 1978), modified, 582 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 20. As under Title VII,......
  • Irby v. Sullivan, 82-1566
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • August 6, 1984
    ...F.2d 163 (5th Cir.1980); Whiting v. Jackson State University, 616 F.2d 116, 121-22 (5th Cir.1980); Grigsby v. North Mississippi Medical Center, Inc., 586 F.2d 457, 460-61 (5th Cir.1978); Shah v. Mount Zion Hospital & Medical Center, 642 F.2d 268, 272 (9th Cir.1981); Manzanares v. Safeway St......
  • Pouncy v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • July 9, 1980
    ...evidence alone. Williams v. DeKalb County, 577 F.2d 248, mod. on reh'g, 582 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1978); Grigsby v. North Mississippi Medical Center, Inc., 586 F.2d 457, 460-61 (5th Cir. 1978). 56. Inasmuch as liability for disparate treatment must be based on claims that are thus actionable, it......
  • Guardians Ass'n of New York City Police Dept., Inc. v. Civil Service Com'n of City of New York
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • July 25, 1980
    ...Inc., 614 F.2d 1300, 1309 (5th Cir. 1980); Mescall v. Burrus, 603 F.2d 1266 (7th Cir. 1979); Grigsby v. North Mississippi Medical Center, Inc., 586 F.2d 457, 460-61 (5th Cir. 1978); Williams v. DeKalb County, 582 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1978); Chicano Police Officer's Association v. Stover, 552 F.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 books & journal articles
  • Constructive discharge
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Texas Employment Law. Volume 1 Part I. The employment relationship
    • May 5, 2018
    ...construed as career threatening, by itself, does not establish constructive discharge); Grigsby v. North Mississippi Med. Center, Inc. , 586 F.2d 457, 460-61 (5th Cir. 1978); Hernandez v. City of Corpus Christi , 820 F. Supp. 2d 781, 804-05 (S.D. Tex. 2011) (“As Plaintiff’s constructive dis......
  • Discovery
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 2 - 2016 Part VIII. Selected Litigation Issues
    • July 27, 2016
    ...; EEOC v. Packard Elec. Div., General Motors Corp. , 569 F.2d 315, 318-19 (5th Cir. 1978); Grigsby v. North Mississippi Medical Center , 586 F.2d 457, 460 (5th Cir. 1978). In Hinton v. Entex, Inc. , 93 F.R.D. 336, 337 (E.D. Tex. 1981), the court rejected plaintiff’s attempt to discover the ......
  • Discovery
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 2 - 2017 Part VIII. Selected litigation issues
    • August 19, 2017
    ...; EEOC v. Packard Elec. Div., General Motors Corp. , 569 F.2d 315, 318-19 (5th Cir. 1978); Grigsby v. North Mississippi Medical Center , 586 F.2d 457, 460 (5th Cir. 1978). In Hinton v. Entex, Inc. , 93 F.R.D. 336, 337 (E.D. Tex. 1981), the court rejected plaintiff’s attempt to discover the ......
  • Discovery
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Texas Employment Law. Volume 1 Part VIII. Selected litigation issues
    • May 5, 2018
    ...; EEOC v. Packard Elec. Div., General Motors Corp. , 569 F.2d 315, 318-19 (5th Cir. 1978); Grigsby v. North Mississippi Medical Center , 586 F.2d 457, 460 (5th Cir. 1978). In Hinton v. Entex, Inc. , 93 F.R.D. 336, 337 (E.D. Tex. 1981), the court rejected plaintiff’s attempt to discover the ......
  • 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