In Edwards v. Parallel Products of Florida, LLC, No. 8:25-CV-02399-AAS, 2026 WL 1026865 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 16, 2026), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claim of sexual harassment asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The court evaluated each of the factors bearing on whether the alleged conduct was objectively severe or pervasive, as follows:
i. Frequency
The Eleventh Circuit has found one incident per week to be sufficiently frequent, whereas an incident every two months to be insufficiently frequent. Compare Johnson v. Booker T. Washington Broadcasting Serv., Inc., 234 F.3d 501, 509 (11th Cir. 2000) (fifteen instances in four months “was not infrequent”) with Mendoza, 195 F.3d at 1249 (five inappropriate instances in eleven months were “far too infrequent” to support a sexual harassment claim). Sexual comments and only three incidents of physical contact are frequent enough to establish a sexual harassment claim. See Olson v. Lowe’s Home Centers Inc., 130 F. App’x 380, 388 (11th Cir. 2005).
Mr. Edwards alleges he was “routinely” slapped on the genitals and told crude remarks through the course of his employment, which was around three months. (Doc. 25, p. 33). Although Mr. Edwards does not provide an exact number of incidents, the term “routinely” implies recurring, not isolated behavior, and therefore, Mr. Edwards has plausibly alleged conduct that is sufficiently frequent to support a hostile work environment claim. See Wiant v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 938 F. Supp. 2d 1238, 1243 (M.D. Fla. 2013) (“At the motion to dismiss stage, the complaint is construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.”).
ii. Severity
As the court has held, allegations of repeated unwanted touching in private areas is sufficiently severe and pervasive. See Dar v. Associated Outdoor Club, Inc., No. 804CV1055T24TBM, 2005 WL 8160201, at *6 (M.D. Fla. July 25, 2005) (“[G]iven…the fact that it was unwanted physical conduct, there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Plaintiff was subjected to a sexually hostile work environment due to people touching her butt.”); see also Johnson, 234 F.3d at 509 (finding that unwanted massages and standing so close to the plaintiff so that the defendant’s body parts touched her from behind was severe). Whereas “simple teasing, offhand comments, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to discriminatory changes in the terms and conditions of employment.” Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 788 (1998).
Mr. Edwards alleges that he was routinely subjected to unwanted physical contact and crude sexual remarks throughout his employment. (Doc. 25, p. 33). This conduct goes well beyond the type of “simple teasing” or isolated comments that the court has found insufficiently severe or pervasive. Given the repeated contact with an intimate body area, coupled with the ongoing sexual remarks, the court finds that the alleged conduct is sufficiently severe and pervasive.
iii. Physically Threatening or Humiliating
“Grabbing the crotch area of either sex certainly conveys a message that extends beyond workplace crudity,” which is physically threatening and humiliating. Cobb v. Sunshine Rest. Merger Sub, LLC, No. 8:09-CV-2639-T-26MAP, 2011 WL 87310, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 11, 2011) (comparing to cases that involve only brushing or touching). Further, harassment that occurs “in the presence of coworkers” is especially humiliating. Fernandez v. Trees, Inc., 961 F.3d 1148, 1155 (11th Cir. 2020). The Eleventh Circuit has acknowledged that “most people have a special sense of privacy in their genitals.” Adams v. Sch. Bd. of St. John’s Cnty., 57 F.4th 791, 805 (11th Cir. 2022) (en banc).
Mr. Edwards alleges that he was routinely slapped on the genitals in the workplace, conduct that he alleges is both physically invasive and inherently humiliating. (Doc. 25, p. 33). To the extent this conduct occurred in the presence of coworkers, it would further exacerbate the humiliation, as harassment carried out publicly is especially degrading. See Fernandez, 961 F.3d at 1155. The court finds that Mr. Edwards has alleged conduct that is physically threatening and humiliating.
iv. Interference
When determining whether the alleged conduct unreasonably interfered with an individual’s performance at work, the Supreme Court has noted that an “abusive work environment can ‘detract from an employee’s job performance, discourage employees from remaining on the job, or keep them from advancing their careers.’ ” Harris, 510 U.S. at 22. An employee’s mental well-being is relevant and “may be taken into account…” Id. at 23. “[T]he conduct in question need not have tangibly affected the plaintiff’s job performance in order to be actionable.” Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., 525 F.3d 1139, 1147 (11th Cir. 2008), reh’g en banc granted, opinion vacated, 569 F.3d 1290 (11th Cir. 2009), on reh’g en banc, 594 F.3d 798 (11th Cir. 2010) (finding that conduct making it difficult for the plaintiff to concentrate was sufficient interference with job performance).
In his amended complaint, Mr. Edwards alleges that “[t]he sexually harassing conduct was severe and/or pervasive and altered the terms and conditions of [his] employment, creating an intimidating, hostile, and abusive work environment.” (Doc. 25, p. 34). Mr. Edwards also stated that “a reasonable person in [his] position would find the work environment hostile or abusive. (Id.). Mr. Edwards alleges repeated, unwanted physical contact involving his genitals, coupled with ongoing crude sexual remarks—conduct that is inherently distracting, degrading, and likely to impair an employee’s ability to focus and perform job duties. (Id.). Accordingly, Mr. Edwards has plausibly alleged that the harassment unreasonably interfered with his job
performance.
The court concluded by finding that plaintiff plausibly alleged that, considering the totality of the circumstances, the harassment he faced was objectively severe or pervasive enough to alter the terms or conditions of his employment.