Hill v. Big Horn Cnty. Elementary Sch. Dist. 2

Decision Date16 February 2021
Docket NumberCV 20-42-BLG-SPW-TJC
PartiesCOULTER HILL, Plaintiff, v. BIG HORN COUNTY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 (ARROW CREEK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT), BIG HORN COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 3 (PLENTY COUPS HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, SAMPSON DECRANE, MARLA GOES AHEAD, FANNIE CLIFF, JENNIFER FLATLIP, and EUGENE RED STAR, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Montana
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Coulter Hill ("Hill") filed this action against Defendants Big Horn County Elementary School District 2 (Arrow Creek Elementary School District), Big Horn High School District 3 (Plenty Coups High School District), and Board of Trustee members Sampson DeCrane, Marla Goes Ahead, Fannie Cliff, Jennifer Flatlip and Eugene Red Star (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 for claims arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 for claims arising under state law. (Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 2-9.) Hill raises seven causes of action in his Complaint: Discrimination (Count I), Hostile Work Environment (Count II), and Retaliation (Count III) under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, as to all Defendants; and Montana state law claims for Breach of Contract (Count IV); Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing (Count V); violation of the Montana Safe Place to Work Act, Mont. Code. Ann. § 50-71-201 (Count VI); and Blacklisting (Count VII) under Mont. Code. Ann. § 39-2-803, as to the School District Defendants. (Id. at ¶¶ 39-69.)

Before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and, alternatively, Rule 12(b)(1). (Doc. 9.) This matter is fully briefed and ripe for review. Having considered the parties submissions, the Court recommends the motion be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

I. Background

When considering a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), a court must accept as true all factual allegations set out in the complaint and draw inferences in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Barker v. Riverside Cty. Office of Educ., 584 F.3d 821, 824 (9th Cir. 2009). When resolving a facial challenge to the plaintiff's jurisdictional allegations under Rule 12(b)(1), a court applies the same standard. Leite v. Crane Co., 749 F.3d 1117, 1121 (9th Cir. 2014). Therefore, the following facts are taken from Hill's Complaint (Doc. 1) and accepted as true.

Hill was hired as superintendent of Big Horn Elementary School District 2 and High School District 3 ("School Districts") in Pryor, Montana, on July 1, 2019. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 12.) Hill signed the Employment Agreement (or, "Agreement") with the School Districts on July 8, 2019. (Id. at ¶ 13.) The Agreement provided for a term of two years ending June 30, 2021 and included renewals of one year annually with approval from the Board of Trustees (or, "School Board"). (Id. at ¶ 14.) The Agreement also provided for a salary, monthly phone allowance, monthly transportation stipend, and monthly housing allowance, as well as other leave-related benefits, travel reimbursement, and health insurance. (Id. at ¶ 15.)

The relationship between Hill and the District soured quickly. Hill alleges that immediately after being hired he was asked questions about his race, when a member of the hiring committee asked him where he was from because community members thought he was native. (Id. at ¶ 16.) Then, during an early August meeting with the School Board, Hill requested that the District truncate its' vision statement hanging above the entrance to the elementary school. (Id. at ¶¶ 17-18.) The statement was adopted from a Chief Plenty Coup quote: "Education is your most powerful weapon. With education you are the white man's equal; without education you are his victim." (Id. at ¶ 17.) Hill suggested the vision statement omit reference to race and emphasize education, such that it only read: "Education is your most powerful weapon." (Id. at ¶ 18.) The School Board declined therequest and became upset at the suggestion. (Id. at ¶ 19.) Hill alleges the Defendants then sent an individual known as "Spooky" to his office multiple times to "tell him how things are done in Pryor," as opposed to the "white man's way." (Id. at ¶¶ 18-19.)

At a September 19, 2019 School Board meeting, Hill alleges he was the target of intimidating behavior from attendees. (Id. at ¶ 20.) Hill alleges that comments were negative and accusatory, attacked his character, and included racially charged phrases such as "white man's way," "white man's world," and "white devil." (Id.) One attendee suggested physical harm. (Id.) When attempting to speak, Hill was laughed at and heckled. (Id.) Hill alleges the offensive comments were directed at him because of his race. (Id.) Hill also alleges that School Board members failed to stop or intervene in the verbal attacks, and some even joined in the behavior. (Id. at ¶ 21.) During the meeting, the School Board and attendees spoke about Hill in the Crow language and refused to interpret for Hill despite his requests. (Id.) The meeting lasted 5 hours, 51 minutes and was recorded. (Id. at ¶ 22.) Hill requested a copy of the recording, but the School Districts produced only 3 hours, 25 minutes of recording. (Id.) Hill alleges that the Districts deliberately manipulated the recording of the meeting, failed to record it in its entirety, or deleted more than two hours. (Id.)

The day after the meeting, Hill informed School Board members DeCrane and Goes Ahead that he would not attend a conference in Washington, D.C. because of the prior day's events. (Id. at ¶ 23.) DeCrane and Goes Ahead responded that he would be financially responsible for the costs of the conference and accused him of an unwillingness to "mend relationships," comparing him to a past Caucasian superintendent that was disliked in the community. (Id.)

On September 26, 2019, another School Board meeting was held, in which Hill informed the Board that he filed a complaint with the Montana Human Rights Bureau alleging discrimination. (Id. at ¶ 24.) Hill alleges that despite advice from the Montana School Board Association's staff attorney to cease the meeting, await internal review, and ensure Hill's due process, the School Board instead proceeded to verbally attack him and retaliate for filing the discrimination charge. (Id. at ¶¶ 24-25.) Hill alleges the Defendants yelled, swore, and falsely accused him of discrimination, culminating with DeCrane yelling "F _ k you Coul [sic] Hill! F _ k you! F _ k you! I f _ king quit! F _ king quit the school board!" (Id. at ¶ 26.) Defendant Flatlip also stated she quit. (Id.) DeCrane then threw a chair and threw a pen at Hill, yelling: "F _ k you Coul Hill! You f _ king son of a b _ h!" (Id.) The next day, Defendants solicited numerous complaints against Hill. (Id. at ¶ 27.)

Due to the events of the two School Board meetings, Hill expressed to the Defendants a concern for his safety and asked how they would ensure a safe workenvironment. (Id. at ¶ 28.) Hill specifically asked to work from home until his concerns were addressed. (Id.) Hill alleges that the Defendants dismissed his concerns and refused to allow him to work from home or to take other precautionary actions. (Id. at ¶ 29.)

Instead, on October 7, 2019, Defendants voted to place Hill on administrative leave to investigate complaints against him. (Id. at ¶ 30.) Defendants also voted to discontinue certain benefits provided under the Employment Agreement. (Id.) Hill alleges that Defendants continued to solicit employee complaints against him and created a process by which they would review the same complaints they solicited. (Id. at ¶ 31.)

On November 12 and 13, 2019, Defendants held a School Board meeting to address the complaints against Hill. (Id. at ¶ 32.) Hill hired counsel to represent him. (Id.) On December 3, 2019, Defendants issued findings on the complaints in Hill's favor. (Id. at ¶ 33.) The School Board found the complaints "did not 'support a finding of workplace bullying, harassment, and intimidation,'" and "fail[ed] to demonstrate that [Hill's] actions arise to the level of a threat or an attempted intimidation of an employee." (Id.) The Board thus found the complaints did not, "as presented, warrant the termination of [Hill's] employment." (Id.) The Board did, however, demand that Hill attend and complete managementtraining focused on effective communication with employees and cultural sensitivity. (Id. at ¶ 34.)

The Board also required Hill to return to work without addressing his safety concerns, stating they "w[ould] not consider other conditions as the Board's position is there is no basis for your feeling that you are unsafe at Pryor Schools." (Id. at ¶ 35.) The letter communicating the Board's position was signed by DeCrane, who had directed foul language at Hill, threw a chair across the room, and threw a pen at Hill during one of the meetings. (Id. at ¶ 36.)

Hill continued to request assurances for a safe working environment, but his request was denied as unwarranted. (Id. at ¶ 37.) Defendants claimed that Hill's "alleged fear remains unreasonable and suspect, particularly in the context of Mr. Hill's past experience in extremely rowdy and rough environments during his time as a rapper." (Id.)

Then, on December 16, 2019, Defendants terminated Hill's employment effective December 18. (Id. at ¶ 38.)

II. Legal Standard
A. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) governs a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss tests the sufficiency of a complaint. Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir.2001); see also Chavez v. Bank of America, N.A., 2010 WL 1854087 at *4 (E.D. Cal. 2010) (summarizing the legal standard to be applied to Rule 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss). "Dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is proper when the complaint either (1) lacks a cognizable legal theory or (2)...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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