McGee v. House, 1:18-cv-00768-NE-SAB
| Decision Date | 12 August 2021 |
| Docket Number | 1:18-cv-00768-NE-SAB |
| Parties | JILL MCGEE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. POVERELLO HOUSE, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California |
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NOS. 55, 56, 57, 58)
Plaintiffs Jill McGee, Lydia Carranza, Tracey Stroud, and Sharon Wade filed this lawsuit in the Fresno County Superior Court against defendants Poverello House and Naomi's House, and the case was subsequently removed to this federal court. (Doc. No. 1.)[1] Plaintiffs were, at least at the time their complaint was filed, homeless women who sought shelter at defendants' facilities. Their complaint alleges that defendants violated plaintiffs' rights when a transgender person was permitted to use the same facilities as plaintiffs. Plaintiffs assert claims for: (1) negligent infliction of emotional distress (“NIED”) and negligence per se; (2) violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act, California Government Code § 12955 et seq. (“FEHA”); (3) intrusion into private affairs; (4) and violation of the Federal Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. (Doc No. 1 at 10-14.)[2] Currently pending before the court are defendants' motions for summary judgment as to all remaining plaintiffs and claims. (Doc. Nos 55-58.)[3] For the reasons explained below, the court will grant defendants' motions in their entirety.
Defendants moved for summary judgment as to all plaintiffs, accompanied by a separate statement of undisputed facts for each plaintiff. In opposing summary judgment, each plaintiff filed her own statement of undisputed facts. The factual background section below is drawn from all of these sets of statements of undisputed facts. (See Doc. Nos. 63-1 (Defendants' Statement of Facts and Plaintiff Carranza's Responses, “DSF-Carranza”), 64-1 (Defendants' Statement of Facts and Plaintiff McGee's Responses, “DSF-McGee”), 65-1 (Defendants' Statement of Facts and Plaintiff Stroud's Responses “DSF-Stroud”), 66-1 (Defendants' Statement of Facts and Plaintiff Wade's Responses “DSF-Wade”), 70-2 (Plaintiff Carranza's Statement of Facts and Defendants Responses “PSF-Carranza”), 71-2 (Plaintiff McGee's Statement of Facts and Defendants Responses “PSF-McGee”), 72-2 (Plaintiff Stroud's Statement of Facts and Defendants Responses, “PSF-Stroud”), 73-2 (Plaintiff Wade's Statement of Facts and Defendants Responses, “PSF-Wade”).) For the sake of brevity and unless otherwise indicated, the court will only cite to one statement where appropriate. In providing the factual background below, the court is mindful that the evidence before the court on summary judgment must be viewed in a light most favorable to the non-moving party, plaintiffs, for purposes of resolving the pending motions.
Poverello House is a nonprofit “that serves the homeless, addicted, and those in need by offering daily meal services to men, women, and children, emergency food bags, access to medical and dental care, substance abuse rehabilitation, temporary shelter, and social services for those seeking and hoping to end their homelessness.” (DSF-Carranza at ¶ 1.) The organization “provides its services through various programs on its ‘campus' consisting of multiple buildings spanning several acres, and which is open to anyone who entered its campus during daytime hours.” (Id. at ¶ 2.) One program offered by Poverello House is Naomi's House, “a 24 bed overnight shelter for single, homeless women.” (Id. at ¶ 3.)[4] Naomi's House is a “‘Safe Haven' shelter, meaning it served hard-to-reach homeless persons with severe mental illness who are typically unable or too unwell to participate in other housing or supportive services.” (Id. at ¶ 4.)
Naomi's House is a women-only, first-come, first-serve facility for new clients, “and most nights there is a lottery to stay.” (Id. at ¶ 5.) “If a woman received a bed for the night at Naomi's House shelter, she participates in an intake process, which includes verification of homeless and an overview of Naomi's House rules.” (Id. at ¶ 6.)
“All first time clients and any repeat-clients returning to the shelter after a gap of time must acknowledge, in writing, that they ‘understand and agree with' Naomi's House's rules, and that ‘breaking' the rules ‘may result in denial of services.'” (Id. at ¶ 7.) First, clients may bring certain personal belongings to Naomi's House, however, “cell phones are not permitted” inside. (Id. at ¶ 8.) Second, “violence, misconduct, including yelling, profanity, and/or disrespecting others is not permitted.” (Id. at ¶ 9.) Third, “clients are required to shower daily if they wish to stay at Naomi's House.” (Id. at ¶ 10.) “Defendants' showers are not private, but rather a locker room style building consisting of an open changing area and seven individual shower stalls.” (Id. at ¶ 11.) Clients using showers at Naomi's House “enter the shower room in groups of seven, undress, shower, and change into their night clothes.” (Id. at ¶ 12.) “Once the women were done, the next group of seven enter.” (Id.) “This continues until all of the clients have showered and changed for the night.” (Id.) “In addition to the main shower room, there is a bathroom at Naomi's House that contains two single-stall showers, enclosed by standard frosted glass doors, and that are typically reserved for clients with disabilities or, on a case by case basis, clients with other personal issues.” (DSF-Stroud at ¶ 13.)[5]
“If a client received a bed, she is allowed to return to Naomi's House the next evening only if she signs into the House by 4:30 P.M. on weekdays, or by 12:45 P.M. or 5:45 P.M. on weekends and holidays.” (DSF-Carranza at ¶ 13.) Clients are not required to pay for defendants' services and they “are free to accept or reject those services at any time.” (Id. at ¶¶ 14-15.) Clients may stay at Naomi's House for an unlimited number of days, “but if the returning client fails to sign-in at the required time [noted above, ] her spot at Naomi's House will be given to another individual in need.” (Id. at ¶ 34.) “Clients staying at Naomi's House for consecutive nights are not guaranteed the same bed or even the same room.” (Id. at ¶ 35.) “Clients cannot leave any possessions at Naomi's House, or keep the sheets on her bed, or claim or personalize her assigned space in any way.” (Id. at ¶ 36.) Plaintiffs partially dispute this fact because, according to plaintiffs, clients were allowed to leave personal items at Naomi's House “at their own risk.” (Id.) “Clients are required to check out of Naomi's House at 8:00 A.M., and are not allowed to access a bed or attempt to secure a bed again until [the] check-in” times noted above. (Id. at ¶ 37.)
During all times relevant to this lawsuit, defendants “received federal funding including grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”).” (Id. at ¶ 16.) “In accepting money from HUD, ” defendants must “receive training per HUD rules and annually acknowledge that they would follow all of HUD's guidelines and regulations[.]” (Id. at ¶ 17.) One of these guidelines includes “HUD's Equal Access Rule pertaining to the placement of and sleeping and bathing accommodations of transgender clients according to the client's personal gender identification.” (Id.)
“From approximately June 2017 to April 2018, ‘D.N.,' a homeless transgender individual who was born a male, but identifies as a female, sought . . . shelter and support” from defendants. (Id. at ¶ 18.) Plaintiffs partially dispute this fact by contending that D.N. is not transgender. (Id.) “Naomi's House allowed D.N. to stay at the shelter and provided all services to her, including use of the shower facilities, in accordance with D.N.'s personal gender identity.” (Id. at ¶ 19.) Again, plaintiffs partially dispute this fact by contending that D.N. is not transgender. (Id.) D.N. and plaintiffs used defendants' services during the same time period. Plaintiff Carranza used the services “off and on from June 2017 to October 2018.” (Id. at ¶ 20.) Plaintiff McGee used the services “off and on from March 2017 to November 2018.” (DSF-McGee at ¶ 20.) Plaintiff Wade used the services “from July 2017 to October 2018.” (DSF-Wade at ¶ 20.) Plaintiff Stroud used the services “off and on from March 23, 2017 to July 20, 2017.” (DSF-Stroud at ¶ 21.)
Clients at Naomi's House were supervised by staff “at all times while showering, and staff were always present in the shower area.” (DSF-Carranza at ¶ 21.) During plaintiffs' and D.N.'s stay at Naomi's House, defendants “had (and still have) policies and procedures in place wherein clients could make verbal or written complaints to staff, ” and each plaintiff “availed herself of that process.” (Id. at ¶ 22; DSF-McGee at ¶ 22; DSF-Wade at ¶ 22; DSF-Stroud at ¶ 24.) During the plaintiffs' and D.N.'s stay, defendants “had (and still have) policies and procedures in place to respond to and investigate client complaints.” (DSF-Carranza at ¶ 23.) “If a client complains about sexual harassment, staff is instructed to document everything that the client reports and inform management.” (Id. at ¶ 24.) Plaintiffs partially dispute this fact because, according to them, the entire staff has not “indicated they received training regarding sexual harassment.” (Id.)
Plaintiff Carranza submitted a verbal complaint to defendants, dated December 6, 2017, stating that “she ‘had a problem with D.N. showering with [her] at the Poverello shower room' because it makes her ‘uncomfortable[.]'” (Id. at ¶ 25.)[6] Defendants discussed the complaint with plaintiff Carranza and “explained that D.N. must be treated as a woman because she identifies as a woman,...
To continue reading
Request your trial