United States v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.
| Citation | 407 F.Supp.3d 365 |
| Decision Date | 18 September 2018 |
| Docket Number | 16-cv-4891 (LAK),16-cv-4844 (LAK),16-cv-4291 (LAK),13-cv-8456 (LAK) |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Defendant. John Flanagan, Plaintiff, v. New York City Department of Education, et al., Defendants. Lisa-Erika James, et ano., Plaintiffs, v. New York City Department of Education, et al., Defendants. Anthony Riccardo, Plaintiffs, v. New York City Department of Education, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
This matter is before the Court on the defendants' motion for partial summary judgment. Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger has rendered a report and recommendation, dated August 7, 2018 (the "R&R"), which recommends that the motion be granted in part and denied in part. Defendants object to so much of the R&R as recommends denial of the motion insofar as it seeks summary judgment dismissing (1) plaintiff Hightower's Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and New York State Human Rights Law ("SHRL") claims of constructive discharge; (2) plaintiff James Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and SHRL disparate treatment claims; (3) plaintiff Riccardo's retaliation claims under the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VII, the SHRL, and the New York City Human Rights Law; (4) the claim of the United States based on an alleged pattern and practice of retaliation.
The Court has considered the objections as well as the government's response to them with care. It finds no error of fact or of law in the R&R's treatment of the claims placed in issue by defendants' objections.
Accordingly, defendants' motion for partial summary judgment [DI 66, docket no. 16-cv-4291 (LAK) ] is granted to the extent that (1) the retaliation claims of plaintiffs James and Hightower; (2) all aiding and abetting claims; and (3) plaintiff Riccardo's Section 1983 claims against the New York City Department of Education all are dismissed. The motion is denied in all other respects.
SO ORDERED.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Contents
Plaintiffs, Anthony Riccardo, Lisa-Erika James, Heather Hightower, John Flanagan, and the United States of America ("United States"), bring these consolidated actions against the New York City Department of Education ("DOE"), Juan Mendez, and Minerva Zanca alleging employment discrimination and retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 ; 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"); the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 296 et seq. ("NYSHRL"); and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-101 et seq. ("NYCHRL").
Defendants move for summary judgment against (1) James' and Hightower's disparate treatment claims brought pursuant to Title VII, § 1981, and the NYSHRL; (2) James' hostile work environment claims; (3) all of James' and Hightower's retaliation claims; (4) all of Riccardo's claims; (5) all aiding and abetting claims brought pursuant to the NYSHRL and the NYCHRL; and (6) all of the United States' claims except for its Title VII claims that the DOE discriminated against and retaliated against Flanagan. For the reasons that follow, the Court recommends that Defendants' motion be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
These related cases each involve allegations that Minerva Zanca, the Principal of Pan American International High School ("Pan American"), discriminated and retaliated against the school's three African-American teachers, Lisa-Erika James, Heather Hightower, and John Flanagan, as well as Assistant Principal Anthony Riccardo.
Hightower filed charges of race discrimination with the United States Equal Opportunity Employment Commission ("EEOC") on August 16, 2013. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 338.1 ) Riccardo filed charges of retaliation with the EEOC around August 2013.2 (Pl. 56.1 Responses ¶ 339.) James filed charges of discrimination with the EEOC in August or September 2013. (Pl. 56.1 Responses ¶ 340.)
The EEOC found probable cause to believe that the DOE engaged in discriminatory conduct and referred the charges to the United States Department of Justice. On June 9, 2016, the United States filed its lawsuit against the DOE. Riccardo filed his action on June 12, 2016, and Hightower and James filed their action on June 22, 2016. On October 13, 2016, all three cases were consolidated along with a lawsuit filed by Flanagan.3 (Order dated Oct. 13, 2016, at 2.)4
Pan American is part of the DOE's International Network, a network of fourteen schools operating under a specific English-as-a-Second-Language model. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 1.) Ninety-nine percent of the student body at Pan American is composed of non-native English speakers. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 1.) Pan American is also part of the Children's First Network, a support group for twenty-five schools. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 1-2.) In 2011, the DOE identified Pan American as a "focus school", meaning it was performing at the bottom fifteen percent of all schools in the state. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 1.)
Principal Zanca was promoted to Principal at Pan American for the 2012-13 school year, and her tenure there lasted through the 2014-15 school year. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 6.) Prior to joining Pan American, Zanca worked as an assistant principal for two years, a guidance counselor and teacher for a combined total of ten tears, and a Spanish language teacher for twelve years. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 13.) Zanca testified that when she was appointed Principal, she was tasked with raising the graduation rate at Pan American. (Deposition of Minerva Zanca dated June 5, 2017 ("Zanca Dep."), attached as Ex. G to Declaration of Danielle M. Dandridge dated Oct. 6, 2017 ("Dandridge Decl."), at 22.5 )
From 2011 to 2014, Juan Mendez served as the Queens High School Superintendent overseeing eighty-nine schools in Queens County, including Pan American. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 20-22.) During the relevant time period, Superintendent Mendez's responsibilities included supervising Principal Zanca and determining whether to grant tenure or discontinue probationary teachers and administrators. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 21-22.) Superintendent Mendez testified that he visited Pan American at least five times during the 2012-13 school year. (Deposition of Juan Mendez dated Aug. 3, 2017 ("Mendez Dep."), attached as Ex. I to Dandridge Decl., at 34.)
During the 2012-2013 academic year, probationary teachers, without tenure or prior service, were subject to a three-year probationary period. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 27.) Teachers were evaluated through both informal and formal observations, for which they received either "satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory" ratings from school administrators. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 32, 35-36.) At the end of the school year, in accordance with DOE policy, all Pan American teachers received either a "satisfactory" or an "unsatisfactory" annual performance rating, based on those observations, as well as disciplinary letters, goals met, attendance records, and, in certain cases, "logs of support."6 (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 39-40.) Assistant principals were subjected to a similar process, including an annual evaluation and a five-year probationary period. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 46-47.) Any pedagogue could grieve or appeal any unsatisfactory annual performance rating or discontinuance. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 44.) Principal Zanca had responsibility for recommending whether an assistant principal or teacher received tenure, an extension of probation, or discontinuance. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 27, 47-49.) At the end of the 2012-13 school year, there were eight probationary teachers being evaluated by Principal Zanca, of which two—Flanagan and Hightower—were African-American. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 131, 136.) Five of these probationary teachers received satisfactory annual ratings, but were not granted tenure; instead, their probationary periods were extended by one year. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 132.) One probationary teacher received tenure. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 133.) Hightower and Flanagan were the only probationary teachers who were either rated "unsatisfactory" for the year or received recommendations for discontinuance, that is, termination of employment. (Def. 56.1 ¶ 135.)
From 2006 through 2011, Riccardo taught at various schools within the DOE network. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 228-31.) In 2011, he was promoted to Assistant Principal of Pan American by Marcella Barros, who held the position of Principal at Pan American from 2010 until 2012. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 229-31, 234.) As Assistant Principal, Riccardo's responsibilities included scheduling, programming, payroll, lunch duty, and participating in teacher observations. (Def. 56.1 ¶¶ 233, 235.)
On June 24,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dodd v. City Univ. of N.Y.
...this District, that standard is broad enough to encompass negative employment evaluations. See, e.g. , United States v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ. , 407 F. Supp. 3d 365, 407 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) ("Negative evaluations may be considered adverse where the evaluation negatively impacted plaintiff's empl......
-
Wein v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.
...this standard can encompass negative performance evaluations and disciplinary letters. See, e.g., United States v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ., 407 F. Supp. 3d 365, 407 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) ("Negative evaluations may be considered adverse where the evaluation negatively impacted plaintiff's employment......
-
U.S. Specialty Ins. Co. v. Wesco Ins. Co.
...court, .... so long as the evidence in question will be presented in admissible form at trial." United States v. New York City Dep't of Educ. , 407 F. Supp. 3d 365, 391 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) (quoting Smith v. City of New York , 697 F. App'x 88, 89 (2d Cir. 2017) ). Colony offers absolutely no rea......
-
Cardwell v. Polk
...under both the NYCHRL and the NYSHRL because the language of the two laws is 'virtually identical.'" United States v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ., 407 F. Supp. 3d 365, 401 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) (quoting Feingold, 366 F.3d at 158); see also Gonzalez, 377 F. Supp. 3d at 300.27 So as under the NYSHRL, "an......