Jennings v. Wayne Cnty.

• Decision Date: 22 September 2015
• Docket Number: Case No. 13-10392
• Parties: SHONTAE JENNINGS, Plaintiff, v. WAYNE COUNTY, SGT. MARK OSANTOWSKI, CAPT. CHRISTOPHER GEORGE, and DEPUTY CHIEF DENNIS RICHARDSON, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan

SHONTAE JENNINGS, Plaintiff, v. WAYNE COUNTY, SGT. MARK OSANTOWSKI,CAPT. CHRISTOPHER GEORGE, andDEPUTY CHIEF DENNIS RICHARDSON, Defendants.

Case No. 13-10392

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

September 22, 2015

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Pending before the court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Wayne County, Sergeant Mark Osantowski, Captain Christopher George, and Deputy Chief Dennis Richardson on July 1, 2014. (Dkt # 25.) No hearing is necessary. See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(f)(2). For the reasons stated below, the court will grant in part and deny in part Defendants' motion.

I. BACKGROUND

This case stems from the employment of Plaintiff Shontae Jennings by Defendant Wayne County as a police officer for the Wayne County Sheriff's Department and her interactions with three of the Wayne County Sheriff Department's officers: Defendant Sergeant Mark Osantowski, Defendant Captain Chris George, and Defendant Deputy Chief Dennis Richardson. The parties do not agree on most of the facts that precipitated Plaintiff's complaint. Thus, as it must on a motion for summaryjudgment, the court considers the facts of this case in a light most favorable to Plaintiff, the non-moving party.

On October 15, 2007, Plaintiff began her employment with the Wayne County Sheriff's Department. When she was hired, Plaintiff received a copy of Wayne County's sexual harassment policy, which included information on her right to file complaints with the Wayne County Sheriff's Department of Personnel and Human Resources. (Dkt # 25-4, Pg Id 325-26.) Plaintiff began working for the Narcotics Unit part-time in May 2008 and was appointed to the Narcotics Unit full-time in 2009. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 607-08.)

In January 2010, Sgt. Osantowski became a supervisor in the Narcotics Unit. From January 2010 to August 2010, officers could receive an assignment from any sergeant in the unit. Plaintiff often worked with Sgt. Osantowski and other members of the Narcotics Unit in close quarters, including in the Narcotic Unit's undercover raid van. Plaintiff and Sgt. Osantowski had a "good working relationship in the beginning," and their relationship "included conversations about their personal lives." (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 632.)

Plaintiff contends that, beginning in February 2010, she experienced sexual harassment at the hands of, and had to work in a hostile work environment created by, Sgt. Osantowski. Between January 10, 2011 and May 6, 2011, Plaintiff kept a journal, extending to 12 pages, in which she documented her treatment in the Narcotics Unit, especially as it pertained to Sgt. Osantowski (the "Journal"). (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 628; Dkt# 27-6, Pg Id 941.) The Journal was "meant for personal knowledge based upon the situation with Sgt. Osantowski." (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 627-28, 639.)

Plaintiff asserts Sgt. Osantowski made sexually explicit comments to her at least once or twice a week, telling her: (a) "I'm black from the waist down," and (b) that she should let Sgt. Osantowski "hit that [because] once you go this way, you ain't never going back" (which Plaintiff interpreted to mean have sexual intercourse with him). (Dkt # 27-2, Page Id 632-34; Dkt # 27-3, Pg Id 773, 783.) Plaintiff also asserts that Sgt. Osantowski told her that he could help promote her to the rank of sergeant if she acceded to his sexual demands. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 635.) Plaintiff contends she rejected all of Sgt. Osantowski's advances and that caused him to "become more hostile in his approach to [Plaintiff]." (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 634-36.)

Sgt. Osantowski also consistently made disparaging sexual comments about women in general. He often referred to women as "bitches," spoke of their body parts or commented about having anal sex with them ("Yeah, I should just fuck that bitch in the ass and I'll tell her who's her daddy"), and he made lewd sexual comments on a daily basis. (See, e.g., Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 634, 639; Dkt # 27-3, Pg Id 786-88; Dkt # 27-7, Pg Id 981-82, 1013, 1015-16, 1023; Dkt # 27-15, Pg Id 1528.) Osantowski also told Plaintiff he could transfer women to his crew if he could "fuck" them and threatened to remove Plaintiff from the Narcotics Unit in favor of another female office with whom he wanted to have sex. (Dkt # 27-3, Pg Id 750, 768; Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 943.) Many of these comments were made in front of his crew, all of whom were male (other than Plaintiff). (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 634; Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 943.) The other members of Sgt.Osantowski's crew also made degrading comments about women, calling them "bitches" and speaking openly about their sexual fetishes, all without any rebuke from Sgt. Osantowski. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 639; Dkt # 27-3, Pg Id 786-88; Dkt # 27-7, Pg Id 981-82.) Sgt. Osantowski and Plaintiff's male co-workers ignored Plaintiff's requests that they stop making sexually demeaning remarks. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 639.)

Plaintiff first brought a complaint regarding her working conditions in May 2010, when she told Capt. George that she "felt as though Sgt. Osantowski treats me differently because I'm a woman[.]" (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id. 777; Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 946.) Plaintiff contends Capt. George told her that he did not share her belief. (Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 946.) Plaintiff represents that she brought similar complaints of differential and degrading treatment to Capt. George in June 2010, and he again told her that he did not "believe it to be so." (Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 947.) In July 2010, Plaintiff told Sgt. Osantowski that she would make a formal complaint against him if he didn't change the way he treated her. (Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 949.)

In August 2010, the Narcotics Unit was split into two teams: "Team Polo," run by Sgt. Osantowski, and "Team Puk," led by Sergeant Stefan Karpuk. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 632.) Plaintiff was assigned to Team Puk in August 2010. (Id.) Although Plaintiff did not report directly to Sgt. Osantowski thereafter, she contends that Sgt. Ostatowski continued to harass her while she was assigned to Team Puk, as documented in her Journal. For example, Plaintiff claims that Sgt. Osantowski: (1) questioned her overtime, her work with Sgt. Karpuk on the ATF team, and her work with the Morality Unit,¹ and(2) denied her overtime and training opportunities, which he allegedly saved for the officers on Team Polo. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 642; Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 950-54.)

In November 2010, Plaintiff met with Capt. George, Deputy Chief Richardson, and others for the purpose of expressing that she was tired of Sgt. Osantowski sexually propositioning her, making lewd comments to and about her, and calling her a "bitch." (Dkt # 27-3, Pg Id 771, 777; Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 951; Dkt # 27- 10, Pg Id 1444, 1446.) As a result, Deputy Chief Richardson spoke to Wayne County legal counsel Ursula Henry and reported that Plaintiff was making complaints of a sexual nature about a supervisor. Plaintiff claims that notwithstanding Ms. Henry's advising that he had to investigate Plaintiff's complaints whether or not she filed a formal complaint, Deputy Chief Richardson failed to document her complaints, conduct an investigation regarding those complaints, or refer them up the chain of command, all of which contravened Wayne County's sexual harassment policy. (Dkt # 27-9, Pg Id 1394, 1398; Dkt # 27-11, Pg Id 1459; Dkt # 27-12, Pg Id 1477-81; Dkt # 27-13, Pg Id 1502.) Deputy Chief Richardson did provide Plaintiff with the phone number to the Michigan Department of Civil Rights ("MDCR") that Ms. Henry had given him. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 645; Dkt # 27-9, Pg Id 1394; Dkt 27-10, Pg Id 1444.)

Deputy Chief Richardson preferred that Plaintiff not make a formal complaint. (Dkt # 27-9, Pg Id 1400-02.) Deputy Chief Richardson believed an "investigation would damage the unit" because "[i]t would create the dissension and the poor working atmosphere" that ultimately permeated the Narcotics Unit by the end of July 2011. (Id.at 1394, 1401-02.) Plaintiff also claims that Deputy Chief Richardson told her that she would have to be transferred out of the Narcotics Unit if she filed a formal sexual harassment complaint against Sgt. Osantowski. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 643, 645; Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 951.) Deputy Chief Richardson admits that he told Sgt. Osantowski about Plaintiff's complaints and that he took no corrective action against Sgt. Osantowski. (Dkt # 27-9, Pg Id 1398-1400.) Plaintiff claims` that Sgt. Osantowski continued to harass her after she met with Deputy Chief Richardson.

Plaintiff met with Deputy Chief Richardson, Capt. George, Capt. Kahl Sabbaugh, and Sgt. Karpuk on January 10, 2011,² "as a final attempt to address the ongoing sexual harassment and the hostile working environment in which [Plaintiff] was struggling to perform [her] duties at [that] time. The command staff was notified, again, of Sgt. Osantowski's unwanted and vulgar advances, along with his hostile behavior towards [Plaintiff] upon rejecting his propositions and his constant reminder that he would have [her] transferred from the unit if [she] did not comply." (Dkt # 27-14, Pg Id 1505.) Plaintiff claims that Defendants failed to document or investigate her complaints or take any corrective action after this meeting, and maintains that Deputy Chief Richardson again told her that she would be transferred from the Narcotics Unit if she filed a formal complaint. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 646; Dkt # 27-14, Pg Id 1505.) Plaintiff asserts that both Sgt. Osantowski and Deputy Chief Richardson started treating herdifferently after this meeting, including a general refusal to provide her with back-up on drug raids. (Dkt # 27-6, Pg Id 952-53.) Plaintiff asserts this "terrified" her and made her "second guess" her decisions all the time. (Dkt # 27-2, Pg Id 640-41.) Plaintiff states that she continued to be treated differently by both of them, as she was denied overtime and comp time and Sgt. Osantowski continued reviewing her timecards,...