Littlejohn v. City of N.Y.

Decision Date03 August 2015
Docket NumberNo. 14–1395–cv.,14–1395–cv.
PartiesDawn F. LITTLEJOHN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, John B. Mattingly, former Commissioner, Amy Baker, Brandon Stradford, Defendants–Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Gregory G. Smith, New York, N.Y., for PlaintiffAppellant.

Susan Paulson (Francis F. Caputo, on the brief), for Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, New York, N.Y., for DefendantsAppellees.

Before: LEVAL, LYNCH, and DRONEY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion

DRONEY, Circuit Judge:

Plaintiff Dawn F. Littlejohn appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Sweet, J. ) entered on February 28, 2014. Littlejohn alleged that, while employed by the New York City Administration for Children's Services (“ACS”), she was subjected to a hostile work environment and disparate treatment based on her race, and retaliated against because of complaints about such discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983. Littlejohn also alleged that she was sexually harassed in violation of Title VII. Defendants, the City of New York (“the City”) and three individuals who supervised Littlejohn at ACS, moved to dismiss Littlejohn's amended complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The district court granted Defendants' motion to dismiss in its entirety, and Littlejohn appealed.

For the reasons set forth below, we VACATE the district court's judgment granting Defendants' motion to dismiss with respect to (1) Littlejohn's disparate treatment and retaliation claims against the City under Title VII, (2) Littlejohn's disparate treatment claim against Defendant Amy Baker under §§ 1981 and 1983, and (3) Littlejohn's retaliation claim against Baker under § 1981 ; AFFIRM the dismissal of the other claims; and REMAND for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

BACKGROUND
I. Factual Background1

Littlejohn is an African–American woman with a master's degree in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from Columbia University. She began working at ACS on April 27, 2009, as the Director of its Equal Employment Opportunity (“EEO”) Office. As Director, Littlejohn conducted investigations of claims of discrimination, trained staff, monitored hiring, counseled agency employees, organized diversity activities, and advised staff on EEO policy, duties which she alleges she performed satisfactorily.

From April to December 2009, Littlejohn's supervisor was ACS Deputy Commissioner Anne Williams–Isom, an African–American woman. Before Williams–Isom left ACS in December 2009, she gave Littlejohn an above-average performance review for her work over the previous eight months. Littlejohn does not allege that any discrimination or harassment occurred during the period in which she reported to Williams–Isom.

After Williams–Isom left ACS in late December 2009, Littlejohn began reporting to Defendant Amy Baker, a white woman and the Chief of Staff to ACS Commissioner and Defendant John B. Mattingly, a white man. Littlejohn's relationship with Baker quickly deteriorated. According to Littlejohn's complaint, Baker asked another employee “for negative information about [Littlejohn]; “physically distanc[ed] herself from [Littlejohn] at meetings”; “increased [Littlejohn's] reporting schedule from an as-needed basis ... to twice-weekly”; “wrongful[ly] and unnecessar[il]y reprimand[ed] Littlejohn; “required [Littlejohn] to re-create reasonable accommodation and EEO logs even though these logs were already in place”; became “noticeably impatient, shook her head, blew air out of her mouth when [Littlejohn] talked in the presence of other managers”; “held her head in disbelief, got red in the face, used harsh tones, removed [Littlejohn's] name from the regularly scheduled management meeting lists”; “refused to meet with [Littlejohn] face-to-face, diminished [Littlejohn's] duties and responsibilities as EEO Director”; “changed meetings that were supposed to be scheduled as in person bi-monthly meetings to twice a week over the phone discussions with [Littlejohn]; and “replaced [Littlejohn] at management meetings with [her] white male subordinate.” Compl. ¶¶ 34, 53, 71, 74–75. Littlejohn also alleges that Baker sarcastically told her “you feel like you are being left out,” and that Littlejohn did not “understand the culture” at ACS. Id. ¶¶ 36, 49.

Shortly after Littlejohn began reporting to Baker, the City announced in January 2010 that ACS would merge with the City's Department of Juvenile Justice (“DJJ”). As a result of the merger, numerous employees from DJJ would be laid off, demoted, reassigned, or terminated. Littlejohn asked Baker to be included in the process of deciding which DJJ employees would be transferred or terminated “to ensure that procedures were in accordance with established ... guidelines and policies,” but Baker and other white managers allegedly “impeded, stymied, and suffocated” Littlejohn's effort to become involved in those decision-making meetings. Id. ¶¶ 44–45. Only after an Assistant Commissioner for the Department of Citywide Administrative Services demanded that Littlejohn be included in the meetings was she allowed to attend.

According to Littlejohn, Baker and Mattingly showed preferential treatment to white DJJ employees during the ACS/DJJ merger, while at the same time terminating, demoting, or unfavorably reassigning African–American and Latino/a DJJ employees. Littlejohn alleges that she complained to Baker and Mattingly about the “selection process and failure to abide by proper anti-discrimination policies and procedures.” Id. ¶ 64. Specifically, Littlejohn believed that Defendants were improperly and purposefully failing to conduct an “adverse impact review and analysis,” which was mandated by the City's Department for Citywide Administrative Services layoff manual. Id. ¶ 61. Around the same time, Littlejohn also complained to Baker about the lack of African–American women in management positions, lower management levels for African–American employees compared to white employees, and pay disparities between African–American men and their white counterparts. Littlejohn's complaints, however, were “to no avail.” Id. ¶ 64.

In March 14, 2011, Littlejohn was involuntarily transferred from the EEO Office to the Office of Personnel Services (“OPS”) and was allegedly demoted to the civil service non-managerial title of Administrative Staff Analyst, incurring a pay cut of $2,000. Littlejohn was replaced as Director of the EEO Office by Fredda Monn, a white female, who allegedly had no prior EEO experience, received more pay than Littlejohn did as EEO Director, and was provided with a “deputy EEO officer” to help with her work. Id. ¶ 78. Littlejohn claimed that the transfer and demotion were in retaliation for her complaints to Baker and Mattingly about “racial discrimination and violations of law” during the ACS/DJJ merger, and for her complaints about “her lack of involvement from an EEO perspective in the decision making process of DJJ and ACS Job actions.” Id. ¶¶ 52, 68.

At OPS, Littlejohn began reporting to Brandon Stradford, the Director of Employee Relations. Stradford is an African–American man. The complaint in this action alleges that from March 2011 to September 2011, Stradford sexually harassed her through “ongoing repeated requests for dates, [requests for] sex, touching, showing of sexually explicit photographs of himself on vacation and physically exposing” himself. Id. ¶ 85. Littlejohn also claimed that Stradford “repeatedly threaten[ed] to further demote” her.Id. ¶ 87. Littlejohn alleges that she complained in April 2011 about Stradford's harassment to an Assistant Commissioner, who declined to act on her complaints. In April 2012, Littlejohn mentioned the harassment to Monn, now the Director of the EEO Office, and to an investigator at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), with “no results.” Id. ¶ 93. According to Littlejohn, Monn did not provide her with an administrative form on which to complain about Stradford's sexual harassment.

On October 21, 2011, Littlejohn filed an Intake Questionnaire2 with the EEOC, in which she alleged discrimination based on race and color as a result of Baker's and Mattingly's actions while she was EEO Director. Littlejohn's Intake Questionnaire did not claim discrimination based on sex or sexual harassment, nor did it mention Stradford. Instead, Littlejohn explained in the Intake Questionnaire that she believed Baker's and Mattingly's actions were discriminatory on the basis of race and color because they “fail [ed] to reassign” her to a position for which she was “suitably and well qualified”; “incessant[ly] harass[ed] and degrad[ed] her; retaliated against her for “complaining about common ACS practices”; demoted her from “admin Staff Analyst M1 to Admin Staff Analyst (NM) and replaced [her with] a white female”; “deliberately froze[ ] out and excluded [her] from all deliberations, meetings and responsibilities”; “relegate[d] [her] to performing the most menial and clerical tasks”; and “strip[ped] [her] of [her] pay level.” Littlejohn Aff., Ex. 1.3 On February 2, 2012, Littlejohn followed up her completed Intake Questionnaire by filing a formal Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC, claiming discrimination based on race and color, as well as retaliation for complaints about such discrimination. Despite the option on the EEOC charge form to claim discrimination based on sex, Littlejohn again did not make such a claim or mention Stradford or sexual harassment.

From April 27 to June 5, 2012, Littlejohn went on medical leave under the Family Medical Leave Act as a result of mental and physical health issues allegedly caused by her treatment at ACS. Littlejohn claimed that, while on leave, she was repeatedly asked for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2025 cases
  • Sivio v. Vill. Care Max, 18 Civ. 2408 (GBD) (GWG)
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • January 31, 2020
    ...action; and (4) a causal connection exists between the protected activity and the adverse employment action." Littlejohn v. City of N. Y., 795 F.3d 297, 315-16 (2d Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Hicks v. Baines, 593 F.3d 159, 164 (2d Cir. 2010) ). Generally, this las......
  • Jordan v. Cnty. of Chemung
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of New York
    • September 5, 2017
    ...and the adverse action." Rivera, 743 F.3d at 24 (citation omitted). There are two types of Title VII retaliation. Littlejohn v. City of N.Y. , 795 F.3d 297, 316 (2d Cir. 2015).The opposition clause makes it unlawful for an employer to retaliate against an individual because she "opposed any......
  • Nwachukwu v. Liberty Bank
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut
    • July 5, 2017
    ...claim. This is the now familiar McDonnell Douglas framework which the Second Circuit summarized recently in Littlejohn v. City of New York , 795 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2015). An employment discrimination plaintiff establishes a prima facie case if the plaintiff can show that he or she is a membe......
  • Cherry v. New York City Housing Authority
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • September 30, 2021
    ...Franchino v. Terence Cardinal Cook Health Care Ctr., Inc. , 692 F. App'x 39, 41 (2d Cir. 2017) (quoting Littlejohn v. City of New York , 795 F.3d 297, 312 (2d Cir. 2015) ), or by showing that an employer treated an employee "less favorably than a similarly situated employee outside his prot......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • Second Circuit Clarifies Pleading Standard In Title VII Cases
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • December 10, 2015
    ...the scope of her duties. Applying the Plausibility Standard to Discrimination Claims The plaintiff in Littlejohn v. City of New York, 795 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2015), an African-American woman, worked at the New York City Administration for Children's Services ("ACS") as the Director of its Equ......
5 books & journal articles
  • Pleading
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Litigating Employment Discrimination Cases. Volume 1-2 Volume 2 - Practice
    • May 1, 2023
    ...(i.e., the demotion) occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. See e.g., Littlejohn v. City of New York, 795 F.3d 297, 307 (2nd Cir. 2015). The courts have further held that an inference of discrimination can arise from various circumstances including, but ......
  • Deposing & examining lay witnesses
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Deposing & Examining Employment Witnesses
    • March 31, 2022
    ...be a Title VII plaintiff? The Second Circuit addressed this issue and the “managers’ rule” in Littlejohn v. City of New York, 795 F.3d 297 (2nd Cir. 2015). Littlejohn served as a human resources director for the Department of Juvenile Justice. Her job duties involved conducting investigatio......
  • Retaliation
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Texas Employment Law. Volume 1 Part V. Discrimination in employment
    • May 5, 2018
    ...of his or her employer, that employee has engaged in a protected activity under the opposition clause. Littlejohn v. City of New York , 795 F.3d 297, 317 (2d Cir. 2015). Further, since Crawford , the Fourth Circuit has rejected the “manager rule” in Title VII retaliation claims. See Demaste......
  • Administrative process
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Litigating Sexual Harassment & Sex Discrimination Cases Pre-litigation activities
    • May 6, 2022
    ...It is important that all claims in the complaint were included in the EEOC charge itself. In Littlejohn v. City of New York, et al., 795 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2015), the plainti൵ had iled a charge of racial discrimination and retaliation. She later sent a letter to the EEOC investigator, “In th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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