In Sherman v. Kendall, CIV-21-484-F, 2022 WL 1094617 (W.D.Okla. April 12, 2022), the court, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s race-based hostile work environment and constructive discharge claims asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
From the decision:
Upon review, the court again concludes that Sherman has failed to allege a plausible race-based hostile work environment claim under Title VII. “Hostile work environment ‘harassment must be racial or stem from racial animus.’ ” Hernandez v. Valley View Hosp. Ass’n, 684 F.3d 950, 960 (10th Cir. 2012) (quoting Tademy v. Union Pacific Corp., 614 F.3d 1132, 1139 (10th Cir. 2008)). Sherman alleges that he was subjected to unwelcome harassment by his trainer while participating in a three-year leadership program. The trainer was white. The amended complaint, however, is devoid of any allegations of racially offensive comments, insults, or jokes directed at Sherman or made to other co-workers by the trainer. It is also devoid of any allegations enabling the court to reasonably infer that the trainer’s alleged actions toward Sherman were racially motivated. Further, Sherman must allege facts to show harassment “sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment and create an abusive working environment.” Sandoval v. City of Boulder, 388 F.3d 1312, 1327 (10th Cir. 2004) (citation and quotation marks omitted). The facts alleged in the amended complaint, as discussed below, fall short of making a showing of “severe or pervasive” harassment. The court therefore concludes that Sherman fails to allege a plausible hostile work environment claim based upon race.
Sherman also alleges a constructive discharge claim based on a race-based hostile work environment. To state a constructive discharge claim on that basis, Sherman “must allege facts sufficient to show both that a hostile work environment existed and that this environment was ‘so intolerable that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign.’ ” Brown v. LaFerry’s LP Gas Co., Inc., 708 Fed Appx. 518, 523 (10th Cir. 2017) (quoting Penn. State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 146-47 (2004)). Because Sherman fails to allege facts sufficient to establish a hostile work environment based upon race, the court concludes that he necessarily fails to state a plausible constructive discharge claim under Title VII.
The court also dismissed plaintiff’s disability-based hostile work environment and constructive discharge claims, finding a similar lack of sufficient connection the alleged actions of the defendant and plaintiff’s alleged disability.