Wilson v. Corizon, Inc.
Decision Date | 23 March 2015 |
Docket Number | CASE NO. 2:12-CV-2878-SLB |
Parties | KRYSTAL WILSON, Plaintiff, v. CORIZON, INC., doing business as Correctional Medical Services; ALVIN YATES, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama |
This case is presently pending before the court on defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 22.)1 Plaintiff Krystal Wilson has sued her former employer, defendant Corizon, Inc., and her former supervisor, defendant Alvin Yates, alleging that defendants discriminated against her on the basis of her race and gender and that they retaliated against her for complaining about discrimination.2 Upon consideration of the record, the submissions of the parties, the arguments of counsel, and the relevant law, the court is of the opinion that defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, (doc. 22), is due to be granted.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a), summary judgment is appropriate "if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); Clark v. Coats & Clark, Inc., 929 F.2d 604, 608 (11th Cir. 1991); see Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970). Once the moving party has met its burden, the non-moving party must go beyond the pleadings and show that there is a genuine issue of fact for trial. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324 (1986). A dispute is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1); see also Clark, 929 F.2d at 608 ().
In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court's function is not to "weigh the evidence and determine the truth of the matter but to determine whether there is a genuineissue for trial." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249. "[C]ourts are required to view the facts and draw reasonable inferences 'in the light most favorable to the party opposing the [summary judgment] motion.'" Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 378 (2007)(quoting United States v. Diebold, Inc., 369 U.S. 654, 655 (1962)(per curiam)). Nevertheless, the non-moving party "need not be given the benefit of every inference but only of every reasonable inference." Graham v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 193 F.3d 1274, 1282 (11th Cir. 1999)(citing Brown v. City of Clewiston, 848 F.2d 1534, 1540 n.12 (11th Cir. 1988)); see also Scott, 550 U.S. at 380 ().
Defendant Corizon provides health care services to incarcerated persons. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 3.) On November 1, 2007, Corizon contracted with the Alabama Department of Corrections to provide health care services in Alabama prisons, including the Donaldson Correctional Facility, a maximum-security prison with approximately 1,500 inmates. (Id.) It has three status classifications for its employees:
During the relevant time, Corizon had approximately 31 Caucasian employees (63%) and approximately 18 African-American employees (37%) at Donaldson. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 3.)
Corizon's personnel policies and procedures are set out in a personnel manual entitled CMS Employee Success Guide [the Guide]. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 4.) The Guide includes an Equal Employment Opportunity policy, in which Corizon pledged to treat all its employees equally without regard to age, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, and disability. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 5.) The Guide explicitly states that all employees may complain of discrimination without fear of retaliation and it contains a grievance procedure. (Doc. 22-3 ¶¶ 5-6.) Corizon encourages its employees to discuss any problem, issue, or concern first with their immediate supervisor. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 6.) If the employee's immediate supervisor fails to properly handle the issue or if the employee believes that he or she cannot discuss the issue with his or her supervisor, the employee should contact the Health Services Administrator [HSA], the Regional Manager, the Human Resources Department, or the VicePresident of Operations. (Id.) During all relevant time, Doug Green (white, male) was the acting Director of Nursing [DON], defendant Alvin Yates (African-American, male) was the HSA,5 and Ken Dover (white, male) was the Regional Manager. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 14; doc. 27-1 ¶¶ 4-5.)6
Corizon also has an anti-harassment policy, which states:
(Doc. 22-3, ex. C, at 22.) The Harassment Policy sets forth the internal complaint procedure, including an "800" number for employees to report claims of harassment. (Id.; doc. 22-3 ¶ 9.) The Policy instructs employees to report harassment to "their Supervisor, the next level site or regional management, or the Human Resources Department in [St.] Louis." (Doc. 22-3, ex. C. at 22.) Corizon provides training and education on harassment to all employees during its new employee orientation program. (Doc. 22-3 ¶¶ 7, 10.)
On May 1, 2007, Corizon hired plaintiff Krystal Wilson (white, female) as a Licensed Practical Nurse [LPN]. At that time, Corizon gave Wilson a copy of the Guide. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 4.) On June 15, 2009, Corizon trained and tested Wilson on its anti-harassment policy. (Id. ¶ 11.) Thereafter, it re-tested her in April 2010, June 2010, and April 2011. (Id.)
Wilson's performance review on May 20, 2010, indicated she either exceeded standards or met standards in every category. (Doc. 22-10 at 36-38 [ ].) Green testified Wilson was a "good employee" and a "hard worker" and that she "performed well" in her position. (Doc. 22-9 at 14, 25; doc. 22-3 ¶ 14.)
The Charge Nurse was the direct supervisor of the nurses on the shift and could initiate discipline of the nurses if events warranted. (Doc. 22-9 at 21-22; doc. 27-1 ¶ 3.)Kimberly Hewitt (African-American, female), RN, was the day-shift Charge Nurse.7 (Doc. 27-1 ¶ 3; doc. 22-9 at 22.)
Wilson testified that Hewitt told her several times "that white girls were weak and that black women were strong." (Doc. 22-4 at 35-36, 39.) She said Hewitt would not speak to her and that "it was just always real tense." (Id. at 35.) She testified that, as far as she knew, Hewitt acted "ugly" only toward her. (Doc. 22-4 at 41.) She said, (Id. at 148; see also id. at 178-79.) She testified that Hewitt and Yates appeared to get along very well and they laughed and joked together. (Doc. 27-1 ¶ 6.) According to Wilson, Hewitt's behavior became more hateful and aggressive toward her after Yates was hired. (Id.)
Hewitt testified that Wilson was difficult to work with because she always had problems that she brought to work. (Doc. 22-12 at 30.) She testified that Wilson had difficulty focusing on her work and that she would forget what she was doing and have to be reminded. (Id. at 33.)
In July 2010, approximately 210 Donaldson inmates became infected with tuberculosis [TB]. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 15; doc. 27-1 ¶ 9.) In response, Corizon created atemporary, part-time LPN day-shift position, the INH nurse,8 whose sole responsibility was to provide medical care and treatment to the TB patients. (Doc. 22-3 ¶ 15; ...
To continue reading
Request your trial