Maiten v. Clara White Mission, Inc.

• Decision Date: 26 September 2019
• Docket Number: Case No. 3:18-cv-978-J-34JRK
• Parties: ERWIN MAITEN, Plaintiff, v. CLARA WHITE MISSION, INC., Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida

ERWIN MAITEN, Plaintiff, v. CLARA WHITE MISSION, INC., Defendant.

Case No. 3:18-cv-978-J-34JRK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

September 26, 2019

ORDER

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Clara White Mission, Inc.'s (CWM) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 23, Motion to Dismiss), filed November 1, 2018, and CWM's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 26, Motion for Summary Judgment), filed July 31, 2019 (collectively, Motions).¹ In the Motions, CWM seeks dismissal of, or alternatively, summary judgment on the claims in pro se Plaintiff Erwin Maiten's Second Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial (Doc. 21, SA Complaint), filed October 18, 2018. Since Maiten is appearing pro se, the Court advised him of the provisions of Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule(s)), and gave him an opportunity to respond to the CWM's Motion. See Summary Judgment Notice (Doc. 27) (setting forth the provisions of Rule 56), filed August 2, 2019. Maiten has filed responses to the Motion to Dismiss, see Doc. 24 (Response to Motion to Dismiss), andthe Motion for Summary Judgment, see Doc. 28 (Response to Motion for Summary Judgment).² Therefore, the Motions are ripe for review. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that CWM is entitled to summary judgment, and therefore, the Court will deny the Motion to Dismiss as moot. See Abdullah v. City of Jacksonville, 242 Fed. Appx. 661, 662 (11th Cir. 2007) (affirming the denial of a "defendants' motion to dismiss as moot when [the district court] granted their motion for summary judgment.").

I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

Rule 56 instructs that "[t]he court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Rule 56(a). The record to be considered on a motion for summary judgment may include "depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits or declarations, stipulations (including those made for purposes of the motion only), admissions, interrogatory answers, or other materials." Rule 56(c)(1)(A).³ An issue is genuine when the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict in favor of the nonmovant. Mize v. Jefferson City Bd. of Educ., 93 F.3d 739, 742 (11th Cir. 1996) (quoting Hairston v. Gainesville Sun Publ'g Co., 9 F.3d 913,919 (11th Cir. 1993)). "[A] mere scintilla of evidence in support of the non-moving party's position is insufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment." Kesinger ex rel. Estate of Kesinger v. Herrington, 381 F.3d 1243, 1247 (11th Cir. 2004) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252 (1986)).

The party seeking summary judgment bears the initial burden of demonstrating to the court, by reference to the record, that there are no genuine issues of material fact to be determined at trial. See Clark v. Coats & Clark, Inc., 929 F.2d 604, 608 (11th Cir. 1991). "When the non-moving party bears the burden of proof on an issue at trial, the moving party need not 'support its motion with affidavits or other similar material negating the opponent's claim,' Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 2552-53, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986), in order to discharge this initial responsibility." Gonzalez v. Lee Cty. Hous. Auth., 161 F.3d 1290, 1294 (11th Cir. 1998). Instead, the moving party simply may demonstrate "that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case." Id.

"When a moving party has discharged its burden, the non-moving party must then go beyond the pleadings, and by its own affidavits, or by depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, designate specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Jeffery v. Sarasota White Sox, Inc., 64 F.3d 590, 593-94 (11th Cir. 1995) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Substantive law determines the materiality of facts, and "[o]nly disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248. In determining whether summary judgment is appropriate, a court "must view all evidence and make all reasonable inferences in favor of the partyopposing summary judgment." Haves v. City of Miami, 52 F.3d 918, 921 (11th Cir. 1995) (citing Dibrell Bros. Int'l, S.A. v. Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro, 38 F.3d 1571, 1578 (11th Cir. 1994)).

Of course, "pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than pleadings drafted by attorneys and will, therefore, be liberally construed." Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998). However, "a pro se litigant does not escape the essential burden under summary judgment standards of establishing that there is a genuine issue as to a fact material to his case in order to avert summary judgment." Brown v. Crawford, 906 F.2d 667, 670 (11th Cir. 1990). Although courts show leniency to pro se litigants, courts "will not serve as de facto counsel or 'rewrite an otherwise deficient pleading in order to sustain an action.'" Nalls v. Coleman Low Fed. Inst., 307 Fed. Appx. 296, 298 (11th Cir. 2009) (quoting GJR Invs., Inc. v. Cnty. of Escambia, 132 F.3d 1359, 1369 (11th Cir. 1998)).

II. BACKGROUND

Maiten began working for CWM in 2003. Employment Records at 26. In late July 2017, CWM terminated him from his position. Dismissal Letter at 2. Maiten was fifty-seven years old at the time. EEOC Documentation at 3. In this action, Maiten alleges that CWM discriminated against him on the basis of a disability and his age, and also that it retaliated against him in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

CWM "has served the Jacksonville[, Florida,] community since 1904 . . . as a service center for the homeless and disadvantaged persons . . . . [CWM serves] approximately 400-500 men, women, and children in need, daily." Employee Manual at 6. As explained by Ju'Coby A. Pittman, President and CEO of CWM, "[g]rant funds arevery important to the financial stability of CWM. Passing inspections by agencies such as the Department of Veterans Affairs [(VA)] is very important to maintaining access to grant funds." Pittman Declaration at ¶¶ 1, 19-20.

When Maiten was first employed at CWM in 2003, he served as a part-time front desk security assistant. Employment Records at 26; Maiten Deposition at 5, 7. Prior to joining CWM, Maiten worked as a mail carrier for the United States Postal Service (USPS), see Employment Records at 43,⁴ and served as a member of the United States Navy, see generally VA Documentation. In his deposition, Maiten stated he left the Navy because of injuries to his knees. Maiten Deposition at 3, 13. His VA Documentation reflects Maiten had service related disabilities, but does not specify the nature of those disabilities. VA Documentation at 2.

After starting at CWM as a part-time front desk assistant, Maiten was promoted several times "including to a full-time Residence Advisor, Case Manager and Director of Residents and Drop-in Center ('Director')." Pittman Declaration at ¶ 4. See also Maiten Deposition at 7-8; Maiten Deposition Attach. at 5. Maiten's various titles during his tenure with CWM also included Director of Residents and Drop-In & Fleet Services, as well as Manager of Residential/Admissions. Maiten Deposition Attach. at 27; Pittman Declaration at ¶ 17.

While working at CWM, Maiten had periodic performance reviews. Maiten Deposition at 9. His October 2015 Performance Review was generally positive, but did include some constructive feedback regarding areas in which he could improve. Forexample, the evaluator commented that Maiten often forgot meetings or tasks. See October 2015 Performance Review at 3, 4, 7. As a means to address this issue, Maiten's supervisor at the time, Kevin Carrico, recommended that Maiten use a planner or the calendar on his iPad to "keep things in [his] memory." Id. at 3, 7. Maiten viewed Carrico's recommendation that he use an iPad to help him "keep on track" as a "suggestion." Maiten Deposition at 13, 14. Although CWM did not provide Maiten with an iPad, he did use his own device. Maiten also noted that at one point in time another CWM employee, Myrtle Wright, was assigned to help Maiten "be on track." Id. at 13, 14.⁵ Maiten's supervisor also commented that "sometimes [Maiten's] frustration with [CWM clients] comes out as negative interaction. The administration has received complaints that Mr. Maiten talks down to the residents at times." October 2015 Performance Review at 4. Accordingly, Carrico recommended that Maiten "be conscious of how you come across to residents. It's not what you say but how you say it." Id. at 7.

In January of 2016, Carrico, the then Vice President of Operations, left CWM, and his position remained unfilled for many months. Pittman Declaration at ¶ 13-14; Wright Declaration at ¶¶ 9-10. In August of 2016, after the position had been vacant for at least six months, Sharon Wright decided to apply because she believed the lengthy "vacancy had negatively impacted the operations of CWM." Wright Declaration at ¶ 10. That same month, Pittman appointed Wright as the new VP of Operations. Pittman Declaration at ¶ 13; Wright Declaration at ¶ 11. At the time of her appointment, the record suggests Wrightwas fifty-two or fifty-three years old. Wright Declaration at ¶ 1 (indicating Wright was fifty-five years old in July of 2019). Wright had "served on the CWM Board of Directors from 2009 to 2013 and became knowledgeable about the day-to-day operations of CWM." Id. at ¶ 8. Prior to being promoted to Vice President of Operations, Wright had also worked for CWM since 2013 as its instructor for the Janitorial/Custodial program. Pittman Declaration at ¶ 16; Wright Declaration at ¶ 9.

Maiten neither applied for nor expressed an interest in the Vice President of Operations position....