Lewis v. Maryland Sheriff's Youth Ranch, Civil Action No.: ELH-11-02494
| Decision Date | 20 July 2012 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No.: ELH-11-02494 |
| Parties | STACY LEWIS, Plaintiff, v. MARYLAND SHERIFF'S YOUTH RANCH, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland |
Plaintiff Stacy Lewis, who is self-represented, has sued her former employer, Maryland Sheriff's Youth Ranch ("MSYR"), defendant, alleging employment discrimination on the basis of disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq. See Complaint (ECF 1) at 1-2. Plaintiff, who has diabetes, asked MSYR to permit her to work a "set shift" instead of a "swing shift," which would make it easier to manage her diabetes "because of eating habits, stress, and sleep habits." Id. at 2-3. She claims that she was forced to resign because MSYR refused to grant the requested accommodation, and seeks back pay and monetary damages in the amount of $250,000. Id. at 2-4.
MSYR has moved for summary judgment ("Motion," ECF 32), supported by a memorandum ("Memo," ECF 32-1). Plaintiff opposes the Motion ("Opposition," ECF 42), and defendant has replied ("Reply," ECF 48). Both parties have submitted numerous exhibits. As the matter has been fully briefed, the Court now rules pursuant to Local Rule 105.6, no hearing being necessary.
MSYR is a group home for troubled youth. See defendant's Exh. 2, Affidavit of Mark Grover, MSYR Executive Director, ¶ 2. Plaintiff began work as a residential counselor at MSYR on January 14, 2007. Id. ¶ 3. She testified that, when she interviewed for the position, she understood that she would work "the overnight shift." See defendant's Exh. 1, Deposition of Stacy Lewis, Feb. 9, 2012, 71:17-20. It was her responsibility to be at MSYR when the residents were sleeping, and to get them up "early enough in the morning to get them ready for school." Id. at 72:1-2. However, she also acknowledged that her interviewers, Antoine Fisher and Robert Turner, did not assure her that she would be assigned exclusively to the overnight shift. Id. at 72:6-8. At the time of hire, plaintiff did not indicate that she could only work the overnight shift, nor did she disclose that she had diabetes. Id. at 72:3-11.
At the time she began working for MSYR, plaintiff received and read the job description for her new position. See id. at 88:20-89:12; see also defendant's Exh. 3, Residential Counselor Job Description. It states that employees must "[s]upervise youth in daily activities—be where youth are," and "[a]ccompany youth to activities planned for group." See defendant's Exh. 3. At the time plaintiff was hired, she did not indicate that she was unable to perform any of the functions listed in the job description. See Lewis Dep., 90:4-8.
Plaintiff also received and read the MSYR Personnel Manual. See Lewis Dep., 91:5-12; see also defendant's Exh. 4, Excerpt from MSYR Personnel Manual. It states that "employees are expected to work such hours as directed by their supervisor in accordance with their employment classification and the needs of the Ranch." Defendant's Exh. 4 at 11.
On April 24, 2007, plaintiff was injured by a MSYR resident while working the overnight shift. See defendant's Exh. 9, May 10, 2007 Report of Injury. On the incident report, on the line next to "Recommendation on how to prevent this accident from recurring," plaintiff wrote: "Have enough staff to resident ratio so one person isn't left alone to long [sic] with the resident's [sic] by themselves." Id.2
In late October 2008, a MSYR resident, "Scorpio," began to harass plaintiff.3 See Lewis Dep., 166:18-167:7. On November 5, 2008, plaintiff reported the harassment to Fisher and to Greta Mattis, a social worker at MSYR. Id. at 153:20-154:2; 158:3-10. Mattis told plaintiff to write a statement about the harassment and give it to Grace Roberts,4 Fisher, Turner, and Grover. Id. at 154:14-17. That same day, Mattis wrote to Grover to tell him about the conversation she and Lewis had about the harassment. See defendant's Exh. 5, Nov. 5, 2008 Email From Mattis. Mattis told Grover that she had consulted Turner, and described some of the incidents of harassment Lewis had told her about. Id. Turner was copied on the email. Id.
Acting on Mattis's suggestion, plaintiff prepared a handwritten memorandum, dated November 6, 2008, to Grover, Turner, Fisher, and Roberts, in which she described the harassment. See defendant's Exh. 6, Nov. 6, 2008 Memorandum From Lewis. In the memorandum, plaintiff stated that Scorpio made "sexual comments and gestures" towards her, and one night "he came out of his room in nothing but his boxer's [sic]." Id. He asked plaintiff "if [she] wanted to join him [in the shower] so [they] could wash each others [sic] backs...." Id. He came into her office in a towel "asking for soap." Id. When she would wake him to take hismedication, "he would roll over and try to pull [her] in bed with him." Id. And, on one occasion when she told him to pull up the back of his pants, he "pulled them up and pulled them back down and shook his rear-end at [her]." Id.
Plaintiff delivered a copy of the memorandum to Grover. See Lewis Dep., 173:16-174:7. Although the memorandum was also addressed to Turner, Fisher, and Roberts, she did not deliver it to them because she "didn't have a copy machine." Id. at 174: 8-14. She received no response to the memorandum. Id. at 174:15-19. But, at some point in December, Fisher spoke with Scorpio, whose behavior improved for the period leading up to his departure from MSYR for the Christmas holiday. See id. at 179:18-180:21.
When Scorpio returned to MSYR after the holiday, he again began to harass plaintiff. See id. at 187:2-5. Plaintiff complained about the harassment during a January 2009 staff meeting. Id. at 174:20-175:5; 179:5-20. She was instructed by her supervisors to document all incidents and draft a "safety plan." See id. at 257:4-8. See also defendant's Exh. 7, Safety Plan. In the safety plan that plaintiff ultimately drafted, dated February 4, 2009, she stated that she would shut and lock the office door, especially when she was alone; that she would permit only one resident in the office at a time when she was giving out medication; that she would let another employee know if Scorpio awoke in the night and it "gets out of hand"; that she would let another employee give Scorpio his medication so she would not be alone with him at any time; and that she would document all incidents with Scorpio. Id.
Plaintiff followed through on some aspects of the safety plan, but was not able, on at least one occasion, to follow the directive to refrain from giving Scorpio his medication so that she would not be alone with him. Plaintiff testified that one morning she was the only employeeavailable who was "med certified" to dispense medication, and dispensed Scorpio's medication out of necessity. Lewis Dep., 261:4-262:21.
During the overnight shifts, plaintiff was the only resident counselor on duty full time in the residential house in which she worked. Id. at 260:21-261:2. She testified that MSYR employees had been trained to handle "situations" in pairs, but she was not trained in how to respond to threats "if [she] was the only person around." Id. at 268:18-270:1.
Plaintiff informed Mattis that if Scorpio attempted to assault her during an overnight shift, "it wouldn't be her fault if he couldn't have kids in the future." See id. at 268:6-9. She explained that she "would defend herself [in that manner] against a man trying to rape her" in the middle of the night when no one else was around. Id. at 268:11-17. Mattis reported this statement to Grover by way of an email dated February 5, 2009. See defendant's Exh. 8, Mattis Memo to Grover ). Grover forwarded the email to Turner that same day. Id.
In January 2009, the same month as the staff meeting at which Lewis complained of Scorpio's harassment, Lewis received her annual performance review. See defendant's Exh. 10, Jan. 28, 2009 Performance Review. She was rated "Below Satisfactory" in the following categories: "Maintains effective working relationships with co-workers"; "Works effectively as a team, maintaining positive attitude and refraining from negative comments / gossip"; "Follows proper discipline procedures"; "Consistently demonstrates initiative and good judgment,"; and "Documentation." Id. Plaintiff signed the evaluation on February 3, 2009. Id. Plaintiff testifiedthat, at that time, she did not disagree with any of her below satisfactory ratings. See Lewis Dep., 251:16-252:2.
At a second staff meeting held on February 9, 2009, it was discussed that, for reasons of safety, it would be preferable for plaintiff to work when there were other staff members present. Id. at 271:13-272:21. Turner proposed plaintiff's reassignment to the 4:00 p.m. to midnight shift. Id. at 250:1-7; see also defendant's Exh. 11, Minutes of February 9, 2009 Meeting.5 According ot the Minutes of the meeting held on February 9, 2009, which Lewis signed, she "commented that a change in shift would not work with her son," because of her parental obligations to care for him. Defendant's Exh. 11, Minutes of February 9, 2009 Meeting; see Lewis Dep., 250:6-9; 274:2-9. Therefore, plaintiff refused to accept the new shift assignment. See Lewis Dep., 250:6-9; 274:2-9. Turner "responded that he had to do what was best for the Ranch and for her." Defendant's Exhibit 11, Minutes of February 9, 2009 Meeting.
Notably, at the February 9, 2009 meeting, Lewis did not mention her diabetes. Turner told Lewis she could work a 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. shift,6 and that her continued employment at MSYR depended on her acceptance of a transfer to a different shift. Plain...
To continue reading
Request your trial