Jones v. Laporte Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, CAUSE NO. 3:13-CV-1330 JD

CourtUnited States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
PartiesMICHAEL A. JONES, Plaintiff, v. LaPORTE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants.
Docket NumberCAUSE NO. 3:13-CV-1330 JD
Decision Date29 March 2016
OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the: (1) Motion of Defendants for Summary Judgment, filed by Defendants, LaPorte County Sheriff's Department, the County of LaPorte, Indiana, Sergeant Stephen Vance, individually and in his official capacity, and Captain Scott Bell, individually and in his official capacity, on June 30, 2015 [DE 31]; and (2) Motion of Defendants to Strike the Affidavit of John Alexander Israel, filed by Defendants, LaPorte County Sheriff's Department, the County of LaPorte, Indiana, Sergeant Stephen Vance, individually and in his official capacity, and Captain Scott Bell, individually and in his official capacity, on December 3, 2015 [DE 55]. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 31] is GRANTED and the amended complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Motion to Strike [DE 55] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Motion to Strike [DE 55] is GRANTED as to paragraphs 10-15 of Dr. Israel's affidavit, which are STRICKEN as inadmissible testimony.

Background

Count I of the amended complaint alleges Defendants, LaPorte County Sheriff's Department and the County of LaPorte, Indiana, permitted and failed to address instances of intentional racial discrimination against Plaintiff, Michael Jones, and subsequently terminated Plaintiff's employment, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e, et seq. [DE 21 ¶ 23.] Count II alleges claims against Sergeant Stephen Vance and Captain Scott Bell under Section 1983 in both their individual and official capacities for "subjecting plaintiff to racially derogatory comments, failing to take action to correct such comments, treating plaintiff differently as a result of his race, and ultimately firing Plaintiff from his position as a jail officer" which Plaintiff alleges was in furtherance of a policy, custom or practice of discrimination established or enforced by the defendants. [Id. ¶ 24.] Count III alleges that Defendants violated the Americans with Disability Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12111, et seq., by refusing to accommodate his medical restrictions. [Id. ¶ 26.] Last, Count IV alleges Defendants' refusal to accommodate his medical restrictions and Plaintiff's subsequent termination were in retaliation for Plaintiff's filing a charge of discrimination against the Defendants with the EEOC and Plaintiff's complaints regarding discriminatory treatment against Plaintiff and other African-Americans. [Id. ¶ 28.]

The LaPorte County Sheriff's Department, the County of LaPorte, Indiana, Sergeant Stephen Vance, individually and in his official capacity, and Captain Scott Bell (hereinafter "Defendants") filed the instant motion for summary judgment on June 30, 2015 [DE 31], requesting that all claims in the amended complaint be dismissed. Defendants received leave to file an oversized memorandum, and filed their memorandum in support on July 30, 2015 [DE37]. Plaintiff, Michael Jones, also received leave to file a memorandum in excess of the page limit, and filed his response on October 10, 2015 [DE 50]. Finally, Defendants filed a reply on December 4, 2015 [DE 61].

Defendants also filed a motion to strike the Affidavit of John Alexander Israel on December 3, 2015 [DE 55]. That motion is also fully briefed. Consequently, both motions are ripe for adjudication.

Undisputed Facts

Preliminarily, the Court notes that Defendants object to portions of Jones' statement of facts which are "rife with improper argument and should be disregarded." [DE 61 at 2, citing Potts v. A&A Mfgs. Co., Inc., 2010 WL 427762, at *1 (N.D. Ind. Jan. 29, 2010).] The Court has attempted to parse out the improper arguments, assumptions, opinions, and inferences set forth in Jones' statement of facts, and merely focus on the facts supported by evidence. Both sides presented lengthy statements of facts - the Court has attempted to set them forth below, noting where there are disputes.

Michael Jones has lived and worked in Michigan City, Indiana, for most of his life [Jones Dep. at 9-10]. He has been married for the past 40 years to his wife, Nedra, and has four grown children [Jones Dep. at 7-8]. Jones was employed by the LaPorte County Jail for fifteen years as a jail deputy, from May 27, 1997, through July 24, 2012 [Answer ¶ 8; Jones Aff. ¶ 2]. In 2002 or 2003, Jones was reassigned to the jail cleaning crew [Jones Dep. at 22]. He held the rank of corporal from approximately 2004 through 2010 [Jones Aff. ¶ 2]. The title of "corporal" was not formally recognized as a rank within the department's chain of command [Bell Aff. ¶ 15; Vance Dep. at 204-05] and Jones was never assigned to supervise other officers [Jones Dep. at25]. Prior to May 17, 2010, Jones had positive work evaluations and no disciplinary actions, and he also did not experience any incidents which he would regard as discriminatory or retaliatory [Jones Dep. at 30; Jones Aff. ¶ 2; Ex. D00120, 122, 124 and 125].

On May 17, 2010, Jones, who is African American, and two African-American inmates, Robert Jordan and Kenneth Lowe, who were members of Jones' cleaning crew, were on an elevator inside the jail. According to Jones, Defendant Steven Vance (who had just been told that he was going to be promoted), stepped onto the elevator and announced to the other occupants: "I remember at a time and date that bitches like you wouldn't be riding with nobody like me on an elevator." [Jones Dep. at 39; Jordan Aff. ¶ 2; Vance Dep. at 26.] According to Vance, he said, "You bitches need to get off the elevator when I get on" [Vance Dep. at 26, 28]. Vance denies that the statement was intended to be racially insensitive. Vance claims he was just "in a good mood" and he was joking because he had just been told he was going to be promoted, and no one was good enough to be riding on the elevator with him at the time [Vance Dep. at 25-26, 105-06].

Jones and Jordan took the elevator statement as a racial slur and a reminder of the days when African Americans were not allowed to ride on the same elevator with white people [Jones Dep. at 40; Jordan Aff. ¶ 2]. Jones told Vance that he "owed us an apology" [Jones Dep. at 39]. Vance "didn't say anything," so Jones and the inmates went to Captain Scott Bell, the jail warden, to complain, but Captain Bell was on the phone and not available [Jones Dep. at 39, 42-43; Jordan Aff. ¶ 3]. According to Vance, he immediately went to the trustee block and apologized to the inmates [Vance Dep. at 107]. However, Jordan denies the apology ever occurred [Jordan Aff. ¶ 4]. Vance never made any other comments to Jones that he interpretedas racist [Jones Dep. at 48-50]. Jones claims that either later that day or the next, Jones reported the incident to Captain Bell, and Bell said that "calling someone a racist is a serious, you know, matter." [Jones Dep. at 45.] However, Bell claims he did not learn of the incident until he received Jones' charge of discrimination, filed in February of 2012 [Bell Dep. at 34-35; Bell Aff. ¶¶ 19, 20].

The day after the elevator incident, Vance approached Robert Jordan and asked: "Are you the guy that had a problem with what I said on the elevator?" [Jordan Aff. ¶ 4.] Jordan reports that Vance was angry and told him something about having a degree in "diversity." [Id.] Vance claims that he wrote a report about the incident [Vance Dep. at 31] and that the report should be in the file [Vance Dep. at 34]. However, in the 2,179 pages of material that the County supplied in response to Plaintiff's discovery requests, no such report was found [Jones Aff. ¶ 4].

Shortly after the elevator incident, on June 1, 2010, Vance was promoted to Assistant Jail Commander with the rank of Sergeant [Vance Dep. at 25]. Vance testified that his "first order of business" after his promotion was to talk with Jones to clear the air about this incident [Vance Dep. at 32-33]. Jones denies the conversation ever occurred [Jones Aff. ¶ 5].

No further investigation of the elevator incident was done until 2012, after Jones filed his first EEOC complaint [Bell Aff. ¶¶ 20-26]. Bell claims he investigated the matter, met with Vance, spoke with one of the inmates present, and even though Captain Bell "understood that the statement was not intended to be or take as racially derogatory," he still verbally reprimanded Vance for an unprofessional comment [Bell Aff. ¶ 26; Bell Dep. at 3-35; Vance Dep. at 106]. A verbal reprimand should be documented [Vance Dep. at 36], but no such documentation was inVance's employment file [Jones Aff. ¶¶ 4,7]. Bell describes Vance's remark as "[j]ust kind of an off-the-cuff joke that he made while at work that had offended Officer Jones." [Bell Dep. at 34.] Bell also said:

A. Well, I did what would have amounted to an investigation. I took Mr. Jones' statement, talked to at least one of the inmates involved, maybe both of them, I don't recall, and then I talked to Sergeant Vance about it.
Q. You took a statement from Mr. Jones?
A. Well, his initial complaint, yes.
Q. Did you interview him in any other respect regarding that incident?
A. If you're asking if we had more than one conversation about the incident, I don't recall.
Q. Other than the written reports, do you recall any verbal report that Mr. Jones gave you of the incident?
A. No.
Q. You said you interviewed one of the inmates that was involved; is that correct?
A. Yeah, at least one of them.
Q. Was that person still an inmate of the jail when you interviewed him?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall that person's name?
A. No, but it's in the record somewhere I'm sure.
Q. Was that Robert Jordan?
A. Sounds familiar, but I'm not going to - without reading through the information I'm not going to verify that that washis name.

[Bell Dep. at 36-37.]

Captain Bell conducted a taped...

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