Matthews v. City of Mobile
| Decision Date | 02 May 2016 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION 14-00601-KD-N |
| Parties | CASSANDRA MATTHEWS, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF MOBILE, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama |
This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docs. 49-52), Plaintiff's Response (Docs. 59, 60) and Defendant's Reply (Doc. 64); Defendant's Amended Answer (Doc. 65);1 Defendant's Motion to Strike (Doc. 63), Plaintiff's Response (Doc. 72) and Defendant's Reply (Doc. 74); Plaintiff's Res Judicata Supplement (Doc. 66) and Defendant's Res Judicata Reply (Doc. 69); Plaintiff's Motion for leave to Amend the Complaint (Doc. 67), Defendant's Opposition (Doc. 71) and Plaintiff's Reply (Doc. 73); and Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to file Surreply (Doc. 70).
On December 31, 2014, Plaintiff Cassandra Matthews (Matthews) initiated this action against Defendant the City of Mobile (the City). (Doc. 1, 67-1 (as amended)).3 Matthews alleges in her Amended Complaint (Doc. 67-1), Title VII retaliation, hostile work environment and race discrimination (Counts I, IV, V); Section 1981 retaliation, hostile work environmentand race discrimination (Counts II, V); and Section 1983 retaliation, hostile work environment and race discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Counts III, V).4 (Docs. 1; 67-1 at 7-8).
On October 12, 1996, Matthews, an African American, was hired by the City as a Public Safety Dispatcher I (PSD I) in the Mobile Police Department Communications Unit (MPD). (Doc. 67-1 at 1; Doc. 51-1 (Dep. Matthews at 52-54)). On August 10, 2002, Matthews was promoted to Public Safety Dispatcher II (PSD II). (Doc. 51-1 (Dep. Matthews at 54)).
On October 19, 2010, Matthews took medical leave. (Doc. 67-1 at 3). In mid-December 2010, a first level supervisor (over dispatchers) retired, and was replaced by Sgt. Carla Shumock (Sgt. Schumock). (Id.) Matthews returned to work on January 4, 2011, at which time she received a written notice of disciplinary action by Sgt. Shumock, advising her that a hearing was scheduled for January 12, 2011 - eight (8) days later. (Id. at 3-4). The basis for the disciplinary action was an incident when Matthews was printing personal documents in the radio room. (See CV 12-353, Doc. 87, p. 4). The hearing was held on January 12, 2011, following which Matthews was suspended for three (3) days to be served in mid-February 2011. (Doc. 67-1 at 4).
In March 2011, Matthews applied for a promotion to a Radio Communication Officer (RCO) vacancy, but received a low score from Sgt. Shumock following her interview, despitewhat she alleges was an exemplary work history5 and a Number #2 ranking by the Mobile County Personnel Board (MCPB). (Id.) Matthews alleges that Sgt. Shumock used the prior three (3) day suspension as grounds for a low rating, even though that decision was being appealed. (Id.)
On April 18, 2011, Plaintiff received a written notice of disciplinary action, with a hearing date of May 2, 2011 -- 14 days after the notice. (Doc. 67-1). This disciplinary action was based on two incidents of Matthews failing to broadcast emergency information to responding police. (See CV 12-353, Doc. 87, pp. 5-6). The May 2, 2011 hearing was held, following which Matthews was terminated. (Id. at 4-5). Matthews appealed her termination to the MCPB and following a hearing before the MCPB, the termination was reduced to a suspension and on July 26, 2011 she was reinstated to her position. (Id. at 5). In the reinstatement ruling, the MCPB stated "there are other violations committed by other employees in this Department that appear to go unpunished." (Id.)
On August 18, 2011, the City temporarily transferred Matthews to the Warrants Section as a result of conflicts she was experiencing with co-workers. (Doc. 51-1 (Dep. Matthews at 104-105, 109); Doc. 52-1 (Dep. Wilson at 54-55); Doc. 51-3 (Aff. Wilson at ¶17)). On September 29, 2011, the EEOC issued written notice of Matthews' first Charge of Discrimination to the City. (Doc. 67-1 at 5). In November 2011, Sgt. Shumock issuedMathews an unsatisfactory service rating allegedly based on the events surrounding the January 2011 suspension and May 2011 termination. (Doc. 67-1 at 5). On January 6, 2012, Matthews was reassigned/transferred to the Communications Unit in her same position as PSD II. (Doc. 51-3 (Aff. Wilson at ¶17)). On February 24, 2012, Matthews filed a second EEOC Charge.
On October 1, 2012 (received October 2, 2012 by the EEOC), Matthews filed a third EEOC Charge of discrimination, alleging Title VII race discrimination and retaliation, stating she was discriminated against because of her race and in retaliation for filing a previous EEOC Charge, citing a July 18, 2012 letter of reprimand (for failing to obey a supervisor's orders and failing to take proper action) and an August 2012 notation from a supervisor. (Doc. 51-1 at 85).
On November 21, 2012, the MPD's Communications Unit received a disorderly complaint priority call, which was assigned to Matthews as the PSD II.6 For her role as PSD II, Matthews was responsible for receiving the information from the PSD I and dispatching information to the officers including updates. The assigned PSD I sent the complaint screen to Matthews with an update about an assault with multiple people, possibly intoxicated, arguing in the background. Matthews broadcasted the disorderly call and three (3) officers were dispatched to the scene. During the course of this priority call, Matthews engaged in a 1 minute 44 second long personal telephone call on a recorded department line discussing her Thanksgiving Day dinner plans with her sister, while on duty. (Doc. 51-1 at 96). Additionally, a few minutes later the assigned PSD I heard the complainant caller yell that the suspect had a gun and pointed the gun at the caller, and immediately updated the complaint screen with "COMP ADV SUBJ HAS A GUN POINTING AT HIM" -- a notation tellingMatthews that the subject was armed with a gun. Matthews did not provide the responding officers with updates and so did not notify the responding officers that there was a report of an armed subject at the scene. See also generally Doc. 51-3 (Aff. Wilson)).
Following this event, the PSD I assigned to the call notified her RCO of what transpired. On November 22, 2012, the RCO asked Matthews to prepare a narrative of what happened on the call, in which she asserts she did not receive the update (that the update light did not light up on her screen). (Doc. 51-1 at 92-95). In this narrative, Matthews states that she believes she is being retaliated against and harassed due to her filing of a November 12, 2012 EEOC charge against two (2) RCOs. (Id. at 94). The RCO investigated the incident and completed a Misconduct Report, concluding that Matthews violated General Order 26.00 Section 6.10-Neglect of Duty (Major) and recommended a General Disciplinary Hearing to determine the appropriate corrective action.
On December 5, 2012, as a result of her actions on the November 2012 priority call, the City transferred Matthews to the Traffic Unit at Police Headquarters. (Doc. 60 at 6 (Decltn. Matthews at ¶38); Doc. 51-3 (Aff. Wilson at ¶20)). Prior to the transfer, Matthews met with the Chief of Police. It is in this meeting that the Chief of Police allegedly told Matthews that he was tired of her EEOC complaints. (Doc. 51-1 (Dep. Matthews at 160-164)). According to the City, Matthews' transfer was effected so that the City could conduct an investigation of the November 2012 priority call incident and protect the safety of its officers. (Doc. 51-3 (Aff. Wilson at ¶20)).
On January 18, 2013, Matthews received a Pre-Disciplinary Hearing Notice. Matthews Pre-Disciplinary proceeding (Trial Board) was held on January 24, 2013. (Doc. 60 at 6 (Decltn.Matthews at ¶47); Doc. 51-1 at 103). The Trial Board deliberated and recommended that Matthews be dismissed effective February 1, 2013. (Doc. 51-5 at 103). Seven (7) days after Matthews' termination date, she appealed the Trial Board's decision to the MCPB.
On May 31, 2013, Matthews filed a fourth Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC alleging Title VII discrimination based on race, retaliation and retaliatory hostile work environment stemming from her February 1, 2013 termination. (Doc. 51-1 at 75).7
On July 2, 2013, the MCPB affirmed the Trial Board's determination that Matthews was guilty of neglect of duty and upheld the decision to terminate her employment. On September 16, 2013, Matthews appealed the MCPB decision (her February 2013 termination) to the Mobile County Circuit Court, Cassandra A. Matthews v. City of Mobile, et al., CV-2013-000221.00. On September 15, 2015, the Circuit Court denied Matthews' appeal and affirmed her dismissal from the PSD II position because, per Judge Stewart, "it is evident that the Board's findings and conclusions are supported by substantial evidence." (Doc. 35 in CV-2013-000221.00). However, on a motion to vacate or modify, on December 1, 2015, the Circuit Court reversed its ruling and ordered that Matthews' employment be reinstated with full back-pay and benefits as (Doc. 46 in CV-2013-000221.00). On December 8, 2015, the City appealed that ruling. On January 7, 2016, the City moved for a stay pending resolution of the appeal, which was granted. As of the date of this Order, that case remains on appeal.
On summary judgment the parties argue race discrimination. (Doc. 50 at 22-26; Doc. 59 at 5-7). As conceded by Matthews, this claim was not asserted as a count in the Complaint.8 (Doc. 66 at 1 at n.1). However, Matthews now seeks leave of Court to amend her Complaint (Doc. 67) to add a race discrimination count (Count V) as she raised such in her May 31,...
To continue reading
Request your trial