Hartwell v. Houghton Lake Cmty. Sch.
| Decision Date | 16 February 2018 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 17-cv-10678 |
| Parties | SHAWNA HARTWELL, Plaintiff, v. HOUGHTON LAKE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, et al, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan |
Honorable Thomas L. Ludington
On March 3, 2017, Plaintiff Shawna Hartwell filed a complaint against Defendants Houghton Lake Community Schools and Collins Elementary School Principal Amy Peterson (in her official capacity). ECF No. 1. Plaintiff was employed at Collins Elementary as a kindergarten teacher from August 2014 until June 13, 2016. Her probationary teaching contract was not renewed after that date. (referred to by the parties as "non-renewal" or alternatively "termination"). The complaint asserts two counts under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the first and fourteenth amendments. Id. at 8, 10. Plaintiff asserts that Defendants terminated her employment because of her relationship with her husband and her stepchildren, in violation of her first amendment right to intimate association and her due process right to marry.
After several months of discovery, Defendants moved for summary judgment on September 19, 2017. ECF No. 23. Because Defendant's did not produce court ordered discovery, Plaintiff had not received complete discovery when her response brief was due. Consequently, a substantial amount of discovery was conducted after the motion for summary judgment was briefed. Defendant Amy Peterson was deposed as well as Susan Tyer, superintendent of Houghton Lake Community Schools. Teacher evaluations were finally produced, well after Defendants were directed to produce them. The document production submitted by Defendants was missing two of the five years of evaluations that were ordered to be produced. Plaintiff also learned of the existence of additional documentation they had timely sought, but that Defendants did not produce. Once Defendants did produce these documents, several months after the initial discovery deadline, Plaintiff sought leave to supplement her response to the motion for summary judgment to incorporate additional information learned during discovery. ECF No. 38. In lieu of granting that request, the briefing on the motion for summary judgment was stricken in its entirety, the scheduling order was adjourned, and a new dispositive motion deadline was set. Defendants filed their new motion for summary judgment on December 12, 2017. ECF No. 46. Plaintiff responded on January 2, and Defendants replied on January 11. ECF Nos. 49, 51.
Shawna Hartwell ("Plaintiff" or "Mrs. Hartwell") is married to Scott Hartwell ("Mr. Hartwell"). Mr. Hartwell has two children, G.H. (age 13), and K.H. (age 10). Scott Hartwell's ex-wife, Neika Hartwell-King ("Ms. King" or "Ms. Hartwell-King"), is the mother of the two children. One of the children was a student at Collins Elementary while Plaintiff was employed there. Mr. Hartwell and Ms. King have joint custody of G.H. and K.H. The children reside with Mr. and Mrs. Hartwell part of the time, and with Ms. King part of the time, pursuant to a state court order. Plaintiff also has a son who lives with her and Mr. Hartwell.
Defendant Amy Ms. Peterson ("Ms. Peterson" or "Defendant Peterson") is the principal of Collins Elementary. Ms. Peterson was close friends with Plaintiff's mother. Hartwell Dep. at 14:19-20, ECF No. 46-3. Ms. Peterson approached Mrs. Hartwell regarding employment andCollins Elementary, and Mrs. Hartwell was hired. Id. at 16:10-13. Ms. Peterson knew the Hartwells and was aware of Mr. Hartwell's divorce. Id. at 14:19-15:24.
At the end of her second year of teaching, Mrs. Hartwell's probationary contract was not renewed by Defendant Board of Education. Principal Peterson sent Mrs. Hartwell a letter notifying her that she was recommending against renewal based on the following: ECF No. 46-9. Ms. Peterson sent a letter to the board recommending against renewal of Mrs. Hartwell ECF No. 46-11. The board adopted the recommendation. ECF No. 46-14.
At some point during Mrs. Hartwell's employment at Collins Elementary, Ms. King began contacting Ms. Peterson and Superintendent Brent Cryderman (Cryderman) by phone and/or email regarding Mrs. Hartwell. Peterson Dep. at 37. Ms. King had concerns about her children, and specifically about Mrs. Hartwell's contact with the children at school. Id.
On August 11, 2015, Ms. Peterson sent the following email to Cryderman:
I have been meaning to tell you . . . Neika Hartwell[King] . . . called me a few times with concerns of Shawna Hartwell (step mom) "harassing" the children during summer enrichment. Apparently the children live with Neika and she won't let Shawna and/or Scott (biological dad) see the kids. I haven't witnessed any "harassing", but did speak to Shawna regarding the concern. Shawna told me she received a letter from Neika's attorney, both of our names were listed as being subpoenaed. I'm not sure what we would have to offer? I know Neika contacted you last year, just wanted to give you a warning.
Ms. Peterson had a conversation with Mrs. Hartwell regarding Ms. King's complaints around August of 2015. Id. at 44-45. They discussed Mrs. Hartwell's difficulty communicating with Ms. King outside of school. Id. Ms. Peterson was aware that Mrs. Hartwell may have been having conversations with her step-children at lunch time or during break, but there was nothing that came to light that seemed inappropriate. Id.
On September 9, 2015, Mrs. Hartwell sent the following email to Cryderman:
Good evening, I spoke with Amy [Ms. Peterson] earlier and she informed me that Neika, my husband Scott's ex-wife, has been in contact with you regarding me. Amy informed me today she is worried that this is hurting my professional career. I wanted to inform you while I am still a parent, this has not affected my job. Professionally I am performing my duties as a teacher for our district. I am unable to control what Neika has or will say about me. If there is something being said that you feel I need to be aware of please let me know. Sorry there have been so many issues my husband is working on the issue, it is not in my control.
ECF No. 49-6. Ms. Peterson denies ever making the statement referenced in the email about Mrs. Hartwell's professional career being hurt as a result of issues with Ms. King. Peterson Dep. at 46. Mrs. Hartwell also testified that, during this conversation, Ms. Peterson advised her she felt it would be best if Mrs. Hartwell only spoke to the kids during her husband's parenting time. Hartwell Dep. at 33. Mrs. Hartwell understood this suggestion as a directive from a superior. Id. at 36-37. Ms. Peterson testified that she told Mrs. Hartwell not to contact the children while she was teaching, which Ms. Peterson intended to be limited to the school day. Peterson Dep. at 160.
On September 10, 2015, Mrs. Hartwell sent the following email to Ms. Peterson:
Hello Amy, I would like to see what memo is being added to my records. I am very concerned about the statement made earlier about this effecting my job. I spent maybe ten minutes on the phone last week during one day of professional development. And only about two minutes of that time was pd we were on a break during the rest of that time. Also I made a phone call during my prep time. Anything else I did was during my lunch or after 3:30, and I was under the impression wewere duty free at that time. As I stated previously I am sorry this is being made into a larger issue than it should but I cannot control what Neika does or says, but I should have a right to defend myself if this is going to effect me "professionally." I am very concerned about this because I put a lot of time into the school after hours and during school hours and I am unsure what I am doing wrong.
Ms. Peterson denies that any memo was ever added to Mrs. Hartwell's file concerning issues with Ms. King. Peterson Dep. at 48. Ms. Peterson also offered testimony clarifying the conversation Mrs. Hartwell was referring to in the email:
what she's referencing on the conversation about the [professional development] is because she was screaming on the phone and I didn't know at the time who she was talking to. She was screaming on her cell phone to someone with other colleagues around. So I believe when she and I had that conversation about the professionalism and this it wasn't due to the nature of the conversation, it was that she was screaming at someone on her cell phone.
On or about September 2, 2015, Ms. King came to Collins Elementary and asked to have her daughter's records transferred to Charlton Heston Academy. Hartwell Dep. at 37. Mrs. Hartwell intervened and asked the secretary not to send the transcripts because Mr. Hartwell and Ms. King were in the middle of a custody dispute, the court had not yet decided that the children could transfer schools, and Mr. Hartwell had not signed paperwork consenting to a transfer. Id. at 38.
On September 10, 2015 an incident occurred after school hours. Peterson Dep. at 53-54. Ms. King came to pick up her daughter, K.H., at school. Id. at 55. While Mrs. Hartwell was walking back to her classroom, Ms. King approached Mrs. Hartwell and told her she needed to release K.H. to her and that she was not leaving without K.H. Hartwell Dep. at 39. Mrs. Hartwell...
To continue reading
Request your trial