In McCarty v. City of Alexandria, 2025 WL 1899987 (E.D.Va. July 9, 2025), the court, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s race-based hostile work environment claim.
From the decision:
The essence of Plaintiff’s race-based hostile work environment claim is that she was generally treated less favorably than her white co-workers, could not access Chief Hayes, and that her colleagues excluded, ignored, and deprived her of decision-making ability attendant to her position. But only harassment that occurs because of an individual’s protected status can be used to support a hostile work environment claim. It is well-settled that a ‘hostile work environment claim fails when it is based on professional frustrations, not personal attacks based on a protected status. Here, Plaintiff allegations do not plausibly connect her allegations of hostile conduct to her race.
Plaintiff’s allegations that she was shut out from Chief Hayes and her co workers are akin to those that have been previously rejected by courts. For example, the Second Circuit, in Fleming v. MaxMara USA, Inc., found that a plaintiffs allegations, which included that defendants had “wrongly excluded [plaintiff] from meetings” and “refused to answer [plaintiff’s] work-related questions,” did “not support a finding of a hostile work environment that is pervasive or severe” based on race. 371 Fed App’x 115, 119 (2d. Cir. 2010) (internal citations omitted). In Daugherty v. Food Lion, LLC, a district court judge in this Circuit similarly found that a plaintiff’s allegations that his supervisor would ignore him and refuse to make eye contact with him failed to establish a race-based hostile work environment. 2006 WL 1642233, at *13 (W.D.N.C. June 13, 2006). So too here. Plaintiff has alleged she has been excluded from meetings and been ignored by colleagues, but the only thing that appears to connect those acts to Plaintiff’s race is Plaintiff’s own speculation. Because this is not enough to plausibly allege actions taken towards her were based on her protected status, Plaintiff’s race-based hostile work environment will be dismissed for failure to state a claim.
(Cleaned up.)
Accordingly, the court held that plaintiff failed to plausibly alleged that the conduct – while “professionally frustrating” – was so severe or pervasive for purposes of a hostile work environment claim.