Shields v. Fort James Corp.
| Decision Date | 09 April 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. Civ.A. 99-1045-S.,Civ.A. 99-1045-S. |
| Citation | 167 F.Supp.2d 1322 |
| Parties | Ronald SHIELDS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FORT JAMES CORPORATION, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama |
Richard A. Meelheim, Meelheim, Wilkinson & Meelheim, Birmingham, AL, for Plaintiff.
Tracy P. Turner, Johnstone, Adams, Bailey, Gordon & Harris, Mobile, AL, Chris Mitchell, Constagny, Brooks & Smith, Birmingham, AL, W. Carter Younger, James L. Banks, Jr., McGuire, Woods, LLP, Richmond, VA, for Fort James Corp.
This cause is before the Court on Defendant Fort James Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 31), and Fort James Corporation's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 32); Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 34); Defendant's Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 35); and Plaintiffs' Supplement to Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 41). Upon consideration of all matters presented, and for the reasons set forth herein, Defendant Fort James Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.
Plaintiffs Ronald Shields, Donald Shields, and John Edwards (hereinafter collectively "Plaintiffs") filed this action against Defendant Fort James Corporation (hereinafter "Defendant") alleging discrimination in the conditions of their employment in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981(a). Plaintiffs have brought a claim against Defendant alleging that they were subjected to unwelcome racial harassment and subjected to a hostile work environment while working in the maintenance department at Defendant's Naheola Mill in Pennington Alabama. Defendant denies the allegations against it and has filed a motion for summary judgment asking the Court to enter judgment as a matter of law in its favor because, Defendant contends, there is no genuine issue as to any material fact with regard to Plaintiffs' claim.
Defendant argues that the bulk of Plaintiffs' allegations involve conduct that occurred outside of § 1981's two-year statute of limitations and that these alleged violations are therefore time-barred by the statute of limitations and should not be considered by the Court. Plaintiffs have not responded to this argument by Defendant.1
The statute of limitations for claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981 is equal to the state statute of limitations for personal injury claims. Baker v. Gulf & Western Industries, Inc., 850 F.2d 1480, 1482 (11th Cir.1988) (citing Goodman v. Lukens Steel Co., 482 U.S. 656, 107 S.Ct. 2617, 96 L.Ed.2d 572 (1987)). In Alabama, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims is two years. See Ala. Code § 6-2-38 (1975). Thus, a § 1981 plaintiff is required to file his complaint within two years of the last alleged discriminatory act. See Malone v. K-Mart Corp., 51 F.Supp.2d 1287, 1304 n. 7 (M.D.Ala.1999). In this case, Plaintiffs' complaint was filed on August 18, 1999. Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiffs' § 1981 hostile environment claim is time-barred as to any alleged discriminatory conduct which occurred more than two years before the filing of the complaint, that is, any conduct that occurred before August 18, 1997.2
Ronald Shields has been employed by Defendant, or its predecessors, since 1984. In August 1991, Ronald Shields entered into the maintenance apprenticeship and, after four years, became a journeyman mechanic.
Bern Duke, a co-employee, used the word "nigger," told racial jokes, and made derogatory statements about black females regularly from 1991 until he retired in 1998.4 Ronald Shields complained to Duke and to one supervisor and nothing was done about it.5 On one occasion, Ronald Shields almost came to blows with Duke when Duke talked about "the way they used to do blacks, especially kids."
On one occasion in 1998, Ronald Shields' supervisor Robert Taylor threatened to fire Ronald Shields and was told that he did not like having to work with certain people at the company.6 Ronald Shields filed a grievance about the incident which was arbitrated. Ronald Shields won the arbitration but nothing was ever done to Taylor except to promote him.7
Ronald Shields has had significant emotional distress as a consequence of Defendant's alleged discrimination against him and has been prescribed medication by his personal physician. Ronald Shields has lost pay because he does not work overtime if Robert Taylor or David Bailey is working.
Donald Shields has been employed by Defendant, or its predecessors, since 1981. In 1993, Donald Shields began a four-year apprenticeship program.
On one occasion after 1997, Donald Shields was sitting at a work table with "Horse" Doggett (who was his shop steward), Marvin Waltman, Stanley Norwood, John Bonner and Robert Harry (who was his supervisor), when Bonner began to talk about "nigger titties." Others, including Doggett, talked about "nigger toes" and used other slurs. Donald Shields had previously repeatedly advised everyone that the use of racial slurs and, specifically, the use of the "n" word, was offensive to him. On this occasion, neither Harry, his supervisor, nor Doggett, his shop steward, intervened on his behalf, and Donald Shields' only option was to leave in disgust. Donald Shields later complained to his supervisor, Harry, whose response was that "he did not know what to do about it." Donald Shields also complained to his shop steward, Eldridge,8 who responded by telling him that "if they stopped that type of BS in the plant, then they will have to stop all BS in the shop." To Donald Shields' knowledge, no one was ever disciplined for this incident, but Donald Shields was isolated by the white employees as a consequence.9
On another occasion after 1997, Donald Shields requested his supervisor Harry to order a "bunch of tools," and when they came in, Harry gave the new tools to white employees and gave Donald Shields Harry's old tools.10 When this happened, Donald Shields "jumped up because he had had enough," but was restrained by English Office, another black employee.
After 1997, white co-employee Bonner made derogatory comments about young blacks and Doggett made comments about blacks "spitting watermelon seeds."11
Sometime in or after 1997, a white "setup" foreman, Stanley Norwood, assigned all overtime to white employees.12
A white co-employee, Pete Bledsoe, continually tells racial jokes and told a racial joke as recently as two weeks before Donald Shields' deposition, which was taken on October 12, 2000.13
According to Donald Shields, the use of racial slurs still occurs at Defendant's mill but the use of "n" word has gone down. In 1998, the use of racial slurs, including the "n" word, reached "epidemic proportions."
Donald Shields has "internal scars" as a consequence of Defendant's racism and discriminatory conduct. He has been tense, aggravated, upset and angry to the point where he has just wanted to "leave the job," but if he did, he would "lose all the way around ." He has been prescribed medication, including sleeping pills, to help him cope.
Edwards is a forty-five year old black male who has been employed by Defendant, or its predecessors, since 1978. Edwards began working in the maintenance department in 1993. He was in the apprentice program during the first four years that he was in maintenance. In 1997, Edwards graduated from the apprentice program and became a journeyman mechanic.
Between 1993 and 1998,14 co-worker Bern Duke commonly referred to blacks as "niggers," and despite Edwards objection and/or complaint to Duke, Duke continued to do so until his retirement in 1998.15
Larry Shields, a white union president who is not related to Plaintiffs, investigated an incident where David Bailey, maintenance director, "erupted on John Edwards." He and "everybody" else thought that it was inappropriate and that it was because of Edward's race.16
Approximately one year prior to his deposition, which was taken in October 2000,17 Edwards heard a co-employee Thomas Spears use the term "nigger" in reference to two black employees.18
During the week prior to his deposition, co-employee John Morgan made racial slurs or derogatory racial comments within Edwards' hearing.19
As a consequence of the alleged discriminatory treatment, Edwards "suffered a lot of mental anguish" and was treated by his personal physician.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) provides that summary judgment shall be granted:
if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Rule 56(c) Fed.R.Civ.P. Beck v. Somerset Technologies, Inc., 882 F.2d 993, 996 (5th Cir.1989) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986)); accord, Tipton, 965 F.2d at 998-99.
The essential issue before the Court on a motion for summary judgment is whether the evidence presents a sufficient disagreement to require submission to a jury or whether it is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 251-252, 106 S.Ct. 2505. The moving party has the burden of showing the absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact, and in deciding whether the movant has met this burden, the Court must view the movant's evidence and all...
To continue reading
Request your trial