Sims v. America's Family Dental LLP., CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:16-cv-00417
| Decision Date | 19 April 2017 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:16-cv-00417 |
| Parties | PAULA SIMS, Plaintiff, v. AMERICA'S FAMILY DENTAL LLP. Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas |
On May 18, 2016, the parties consented to proceed before a United States magistrate judge for all purposes, including the entry of a final judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Docket Entry #11). The case was then transferred to this court. In this action, Plaintiff Paula Sims ("Plaintiff," "Sims") brings claims against her former employer, Defendant America's Family Dental LLP ("Defendant," "AFD," "the company"), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ["Title VII"], as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 ["PDA"].1 Plaintiff alleges that AFD discriminated against her, on the basis of her sex and pregnancy, by "demoting" her, and, subsequently, terminating her employment. Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment that was filed by Defendant. (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment ["Motion"], Docket Entry #21). Responses and replies have been filed, as well. (Plaintiff's Response to Defendant America's Family Dental LLP's Motion for Summary Judgment ["Response"], Docket Entry #24; Defendant's Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment ["Reply"], Docket Entry #27; Plaintiff's Surreply to Defendants for Their Motion for SummaryJudgment ["Surreply"], Docket Entry #28). Having reviewed the pleadings, the evidence, and the applicable law, it is ORDERED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED.
Defendant America's Family Dental LLP maintains dental offices in Tomball, Texas, and Spring, Texas. (Motion at 1; Motion at Exhibit ["Ex."] 1 ["Gosnell Decl."], 2; Response at Ex. 6, 1-3). Dr. Josh Gosnell ["Dr. Gosnell"] is a partner in AFD, and treats patients at the Tomball office. (Notice of Removal at Ex. C ["Original Petition"], 3, Docket Entry #1; See Response at Ex. 12 ["Wilkerson Affidavit"], 1). Plaintiff Paula Sims worked for AFD, from December 19, 2008, until November 12, 2012, when she was terminated. (Original Petition at 3,4; Gosnell Decl. at 2; Response at 5). Sims was assigned to work at both AFD offices, and this action arises from her complaints that Defendant discriminated against her, because of her sex and pregnancy, while she was employed. . Plaintiff contends, specifically, that she was "demoted" from the position of "registered dental assistant" to that of "hygiene assistant [sic][,]" due to her pregnancy. (Original Petition at 3). She also alleges that Dr. Gosnell made repeated pejorative comments and jokes related to her pregnancy. (See id. at 3-4; Motion at Ex. 7 ["EEOC Charge"], 3; Sims Decl. at 2). Sims insists that the termination of her employment with AFD resulted from this unlawful discrimination. (Id. at 5).
As a dental assistant, Plaintiff's duties included administrative work, such as taking patient notes and preparing patient charts; administering sealant to patients' teeth; and assisting in AFD dental procedures by providing suction, making temporary restoration materials, and removing sutures. (Response at 12; Sims Depo. at 27:10-28:11). Sims was also sometimes required to administer nitrous oxide to sedate patients. (Gosnell Decl. at 2; Wilkerson Affidavit at 2). In lateMay, 2012, Plaintiff was promoted, and began working as a "registered dental head." (Original Petition at 3; Sims Depo. at 74:17-25). It is unclear whether Sims assumed any additional duties along with her new position, but she was given an annual raise of $4,000. (See Original Petition at 3).
In June, 2012, Plaintiff informed Dr. Gosnell that she was pregnant. (Motion at 4; Response at 5; Sims Depo at 74: 22-25; Original Petition at 3; Gosnell Decl. at 3). Sims alleges that Dr. Gosnell became "angry" at this news, and asked her "why [she] would [have another child[.]" (Response at Ex. 11 ["Sims Decl."], 1). Plaintiff alleges further that he said that he did not know if he should fire her,2 and that he must consult with Kasie Wilkerson ["Wilkerson"], another dental assistant at AFD, to determine "what to do with her." (Original Petition at 3). Sims claims that, after this conversation, Dr. Gosnell began to make disparaging comments related to her pregnancy. (Id.). She contends that he told patients and other AFD employees that she was "pregnant, and that he was going to fire her." (Id.). She also alleges that "almost every day[,]" he told her, explicitly, that he was going to fire her, because she was pregnant. (Id. at 4; Sims Depo at 78:9-10). Sims claims further that Dr. Gosnell would ask female job applicants if they were "pregnant, sterile, or wearing a chastity belt[,]" and that he would blame any office mistakes on her pregnancy. (Original Petition at 3). She acknowledges, however, that some of Dr. Gosnell's comments seemed to have been made in jest. (Id.).
On June 6, 2012, Plaintiff met with Dr. Gosnell and Reba Rodano ["Rodano"], a manager at AFD. (Original Petition at 3). At that time, she was informed that she would immediately begin working as a hygienist assistant, but that her wages would not change, and that the job reassignmentwas temporary. (Original Petition at 3; Gosnell Decl. at 5). Dr. Gosnell reportedly told her that she was reassigned to minimize her exposure to nitrous oxide, as hygienist assistants at AFD rarely work with nitrous oxide. (Gosnell Decl. at 3). Indeed, he testified that, although nitrous oxide is "frequently used during dental procedures to relieve anxiety and pain[,]" a pregnant woman who is exposed to the gas may increase her risk of miscarriage. (Motion at 4; Gosnell Decl. at 3). Plaintiff viewed this change as a demotion, and alleges that other women who became pregnant "worked in [another] room[,] instead of [] in the room where nitrous [oxide] was being utilized." (Sims Decl. at 2).
Kasie Wilkerson testified that, on a typical day, AFD performed dental services for ten to fifteen patients at its Tomball office. (Wilkerson Affidavit at 2). She estimated that, of that number, only two patients might require nitrous oxide. (Id.). Neither Sims nor Wilkerson could recall a time when nitrous oxide had been used on more than one patient at a time. (Sims Decl. at 2; Wilkerson Affidavit at 2). Wilkerson further testified that she could have "eas[ily] [] handle[d] all of the [] patients [who required nitrous oxide sedation,] and [allow Plaintiff] to handle the patients [who did] not [require treatment with] nitrous [oxide]." (Wilkerson Affidavit at 2). Sims said that she "d[id] n[o]t think" that Defendant had filled her dental assistant position, but she could not recall how it was able to treat all of its patients who needed sedation, without doing so. (Sims Depo. at 101:12-24).
After her "demotion," Sims worked as an assistant to Deanna Otts ["Otts"], a dental hygienist at AFD. (Motion at 6). Otts testified that Plaintiff spoke openly about her disapproval of Dr. Gosnell, as well as the office operations, and the condition of the equipment. (Motion at Ex. 3 ["Otts Affidavit"], 2). Otts also claims that she overheard Sims complaining to patients about aspectsof AFD's human resource policy, including its employee bonus distribution practices, lunch breaks, and work hour requirements. (Id.). She stated that, in November, 2012, she spoke with Rodano, as well as with Dr. Gosnell, about Sims' negative comments. (Otts Affidavit at 2; Motion at Ex. 4 ["Rodano Affidavit"], 2). Rodano testified that, after she received multiple complaints about Plaintiff's caustic remarks, she advised Sims to temper her attitude. (Rodano Affidavit at 3). Sims, on the other hand, denies speaking poorly about the company, its dentists, or its office equipment. (Sims Depo. at 71:7-10). She testified that she had never been counseled about her "negative" attitude or critical comments that she had allegedly made about the company. (Id. at 71:14-19; Rodano Affidavit at 3).
Nevertheless, Plaintiff was terminated on November 12, 2012, ostensibly, "because of critical comments that she had made in the presence of patients about Dr. Gosnell, [the company], and [its] equipment." (Rodando Affidavit at 3). Rodano stated, expressly, that Plaintiff was not terminated due to her pregnancy or sex. (Id.). Plaintiff maintains that she was not given a reason for her termination, but she insists that her sex and pregnancy were motivating factors in her discharge. (Original Petition at 5; Sims Decl. at 2).
Plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on December 11, 2012. (Original Petition at 4; EEOC Charge at 2). In that charge, Sims alleged that AFD discriminated against her on the basis of her sex. (Id.). Before this court, she contends that she was "demoted," because of her pregnancy. Plaintiff also claims that Dr. Gosnell made disparaging statements about her, due to her sex and her pregnancy. (Id.). Sims received a right to sue letter from the EEOC on October 21, 2015, but she has not submitted a copyof that letter.3 (Original Petition at 4). She filed an action against Defendant in state court on January 6, 2016. (Id.). In her state court petition, Sims made claims for sex and pregnancy discrimination and wrongful termination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. (Id. at 4-5). On February 17, 2016, Defendant removed this action to federal court on the basis of the court's federal question jurisdiction. (Notice of Removal at 1, Docket Entry #1).
Defendant now moves for summary judgment. In support of its motion, AFD contends, first, that Sims cannot prove a prima facie case of pregnancy discrimination, based on her transfer to the position of dental hygienist assistant. (Id. at 11-13). In support of its argument, AFD claims that Plaintiff was...
To continue reading
Request your trial