In Cunningham, Elisha v. R&E Automated Sys., LLC, No. 7:24-CV-6431-TMC, 2026 WL 2575487 (D.S.C. Sept. 1, 2026), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to one plaintiff’s claim of a race-based hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
In sum, plaintiff based her hostile work environment claim on a single co-worker’s use of the n-word; specifically, she alleges that she overheard him say it when speaking with other employees.
The court concluded that plaintiff demonstrated, at this stage of the proceedings, that this conduct was unwelcome, based on race, and sufficiently “severe or pervasive.”
From the decision:
Accordingly, while, arguably, an offensive remark that is not directed at the plaintiff may not carry the same weight in terms of severity as an offensive remark directed at her, there is evidence that Cunningham overheard Almestica using the n-word towards others and that she was personally aware of Almestica using the term outside her presence. Ultimately, given the offensive and derogatory nature of the n-word as well as the number of times Cunningham testified she either personally heard Almestica use the term or became aware of his use of the term during her last four months of employment with Defendant, the court finds, within the context of a motion for summary judgment, Cunningham has set forth enough evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude Almestica’s unwelcomed, racially-based conduct was severe or pervasive to satisfy this element of her hostile work environment claims.
(Paragraphing altered.)
The court further held that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence from which a jury could find defendant knew or should have known about Almestica’s conduct, and faile to take effective action to stop it.