Yazzie v. Nat'l Org. for Women
| Jurisdiction | United States,Federal |
| Parties | GILDA YAZZIE, Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN, et al., Defendants. |
| Decision Date | 22 January 2024 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
| Docket Number | Civil Action 19-3845 (RDM) |
In 2017, Toni Van Pelt and Gilda Yazzie ran on the same ticket to serve four-year terms, respectively, as President and Vice President of the National Organization for Women (“NOW”). They campaigned and won election together. That, however, is where their collaboration ended. Although all agree that the relationship soured soon after they took office, Yazzie and Van Pelt characterize the relevant events in starkly different terms. On Yazzie's telling, Van Pelt told NOW staff members that she ran on the same ticket with Yazzie only because she needed a woman of color on the ticket (Yazzie is Native American), and Van Pelt almost immediately moved to oust Yazzie from office because of her race. According to Yazzie, Van Pelt excluded her from the budget process, even though the Vice President was supposed to act as the organization's Treasurer; locked her out of the office and out of her email account physically assaulted her; falsely accused her of financial misdeeds; and, more generally launched what was essentially a second campaign-this time to convince NOW's National Board to terminate Yazzie. In contrast, on Van Pelt's telling, Yazzie did, in fact, engage in financial misdeeds and more generally, was not up to the task of serving as the organization's Vice President. The National Board eventually sided with Van Pelt and terminated Yazzie.
Yazzie then brought this action against NOW, Van Pelt, and two NOW National Board members, Cynthia Drabek and Beth Corbin (“Defendants”). As initially framed, her complaint asserted claims for race discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and state law claims for assault battery, and defamation. Dkt. 1-3 (Compl.). The Court, however, previously dismissed Yazzie's claims for assault and battery. Dkt. 17.
The parties have completed and discovery, and the matter is now before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment with respect to Yazzie's remaining claims. Dkt. 30. For the reasons explained below, the Court will DENY that motion with regard to the Title VII and section 1981 claims and will GRANT in part and DENY in part that motion with respect to Yazzie's defamation claim.
For purposes of resolving the motion for summary judgment, the Court takes “the facts in the record and all reasonable inferences derived therefrom in a light most favorable” to the nonmoving party. Coleman v. Duke, 867 F.3d 204, 209 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (quoting Al-Saffy v. Vilsack, 827 F.3d 85, 89 (D.C. Cir. 2016)). Understood in that light, the relevant background is as follows.
NOW is a grassroots feminist organization that has chapters across the United States and is headquartered in Washington, D.C. Dkt. 30-2 at 9. The organization is led by a National Board of Directors (“National Board” or “Board”) and by two elected officers, the President and Vice President, who are chosen every four years at NOW's National Conference. Dkt. 30-1 at 1, 3 (Defs. SUMF ¶¶ 1, 12). The National Board is divided into various committees, including an Audit Committee, which “is responsible for ensuring the [o]rganization has effective internal controls over financial reporting,” id. at 4 (Defs. SUMF ¶¶ 22), an Executive Committee, and a Budget Committee. Under the organization's bylaws, the President serves as the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, while the Vice President serves as the Treasurer and performs other duties as assigned by the President and the Board. Id. at 3 (Defs. SUMF ¶¶ 13-15). NOW contracts with Halt Buzas and Powell, LLC as its independent auditors. Id. at 4 (Defs. SUMF ¶ 24). NOW also employs staff members who assist in running the organization. According to Yazzie, from “July 17, 2017 to July 31, 2017, . . . NOW employed 22 individuals.” Dkt. 33-3, at 1 (Pl. Resp. to Defs. Fact 4). NOW disagrees and counters that from “July 17, 2017 to May 17, 2019, [it] employed 14 or fewer employees” at any given time. Dkt. 30-1 at 2 (Defs. SUMF ¶ 4).
At NOW's July 2017 National Conference, Toni Van Pelt was elected to serve as President of the organization, and Gilda Yazzie was elected to serve as Vice President. Id. at 3 (Defs. SUMF ¶ 12). Yazzie identifies as Native American and Dine (Navajo). Dkt. 33-4 at 1 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 1). In the lead-up to the election, Yazzie and Van Pelt campaigned together. Dkt. 33 at 9. According to NOW, Yazzie “prepared campaign material in which she identified as an enrolled member of the Navajo Nation.” Dkt. 30-1 at 2 (Defs. SUMF ¶ 7). Yazzie disputes this, asserting that she did not prepare the “campaign materials” and that she “saw them for the first time when she arrived at the National Conference.” Dkt. 33-3 at 2 (Pl. Resp. to Defs. Fact 7); see also Dkt. 33-4 at 1 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 2). Yazzie also appeared with Van Pelt several times during the campaign. Dkt. 33-4 at 2 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 3). Yazzie claims that “[e]ach time, Van Pelt introduced Yazzie as ‘100% Navajo[]' or ‘Native American.'” Id. Yazzie found this “blood quantum counting racist and offensive.” Id. (Pl. SUMF ¶ 4).
During the election, Van Pelt treated Yazzie “in a friendly manner.” Dkt. 33-4 at 2 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 5). After the election, that changed. On Yazzie's account, Van Pelt “no longer treated [her] with a friendly demeanor;” she avers that Van Pelt's interactions with her “were unsmiling and minimal.” Dkt. 33-4 at 2 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 6). “There was no argument or even conversation between” them; rather, according to Yazzie, Van Pelt “simply refused to communicate or communicated in minimal ways.” Id. “During the initial two weeks of training,” for example, “Van Pelt refused to speak or meet with . . . Yazzie privately.” Dkt. 33-4 at 2-3 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 7). When they began their term, Van Pelt purportedly “refused to include Yazzie in email” exchanges or in “meetings related to operating the organization or any other purpose.” Dkt. 33-4 at 3 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 9). Yazzie further avers that “Van Pelt as President/CFO was required to provide Yazzie, in her role as Treasurer, with monthly financial reports to enable [her] to perform her job as Vice President,” but she never did so. Dkt. 33-4 at 3 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 10). More generally, Yazzie maintains that she “was never given access to the NOW financial accounting software n[o]r was she allowed to log into it at any time.” Dkt. 33-4 at 3 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 11). Instead, she received only staff-level (as opposed to officer-level) access to the NOW local area network passwords and programs. Dkt. 33-4 at 3-4 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 12). Emily Imhoff, who served at relevant times as the President's assistant and later as Coordinator of the President's Office, corroborates aspects of this account, attesting that Van Pelt froze Yazzie “out of the administration: refusing to speak with her, [to] include her in meetings, or [to] include her in important email threads.” Dkt. 33-1 at 39 (Imhoff Decl. ¶ 3).
Van Pelt and Yazzie's relationship deteriorated further in 2018. Although the parties dispute precisely what occurred, tensions reached a zenith on January 29, 2018. As Yazzie recounts events:
On the morning of January 29, 2018, I was meeting with Linda Berg in her office. [A]t 11:20 a.m., Toni Van Pelt interrupted the meeting and started yelling at me. I was intimidated by her yelling and immediately retreated to my office[] but was pursued by Toni Van Pelt. When I got to my office, Toni Van Pelt went in after me and backed me into a corner behind my desk using her body. From the expressions on her face and her tone of voice, Toni looked angry. She was yelling: “You won't be here for three years!” “I am the president, so you have to do what I say!” “You don't understand” and “You [‘]P.O.C.[']” Toni Van Pelt cornered me in my office, she threw papers, grabbed my arm and bumped (body slammed) me. Toni Van Pelt is much taller than me, I was frightened. I was able to get out of my office and returned to Linda Berg's office.... Berg accompanied me back to my office, while Toni Van Pelt backed off.... Van Pelt said “P.O.C” phonetically, in a hostile manner as if it were a slur and a way to indicate that people of color were somehow a different set of individuals.
Dkt. 33-1 at 7 (Yazzie Decl. ¶ 13). According to Yazzie, she had “heard the term P.O.C. used in NOW before,” simply as a shorthand for “‘People of Color.'” Dkt. 33-1 at 7 (Yazzie Decl. ¶ 14). But, on Yazzie's telling, Van Pelt used the phrase “You P.O.C.'s” in a derogatory and hostile manner “when complaining to [Yazzie] or the staff.” Id. (emphasis added). Used in this way, “it seemed like a racial epithet and a way to indicate a separate class of people.” Id. at 8. Defendants dispute these allegations and contend that Yazzie's characterization of Van Pelt's meaning constitutes “improper speculation and conjecture.” Dkt. 34-3 at 9.
Following the January 29, 2018 incident, Yazzie sent various communications to the staff and leadership. First, she “sent a text message to NOW staff in which she [stated that] she had been ‘physically threaten[ed] in a demeaning situation by Toni Van Pelt'” and that “‘Van Pelt has created a hostile workplace for me.'” Dkt. 33-4 at 8 (Pl. SUMF ¶ 33); see also Dkt. 33-1 at 23 . Second Yazzie sent a message to the National Board and staff describing how Van Pelt had allegedly “threaten[ed] [her] with aggressive behavior, physical and verbal[,]” and threatened, among other things, that “‘it won't be 3 more years.'” Dkt. 33-1 at 25 (Yazzie Decl....
To continue reading
Request your trial