 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hendon v. City of Everett9/9/2002
In this employment discrimination case, no questions of fact exist about Lloyd Herndon's harassment, retaliation, negligent infliction of emotional distress, outrage, defamation, or breach of contract claims. The trial court therefore properly granted summary judgment in favor of the City of Everett, and we affirm.
FACTS
Lloyd Herndon works for the City of Everett as a police officer. On May 27, 1997, he was transferred from detective to patrolman. Herndon is Asian, but he acknowledges the demotion was not motivated by his race. Shortly after his transfer, he asked his new supervisor, Chuck Innes, if he could take June 10 as a vacation day. Innes denied the request because the absence would have caused the number of available officers that day to fall below the minimum required by the union contract. On June 8, Herndon called in sick. On the mistaken belief that Herndon's requested vacation day was the 8th, Innes told other officers at a briefing that day that Herndon was likely faking his illness, and that he planned to drive by Herndon's house. Another officer called Herndon at home to warn him. Innes never drove to Herndon's home.
Herndon complained about Innes' conduct to Ricardo DeVilla, the City's Affirmative Action Officer. He did not assert mistreatment because of his race or national origin. Instead, he complained that Innes' conduct insulted his credibility and integrity, especially in light of his recent transfer. At DeVilla's request, Herndon provided a written statement, which also made no mention of harassment because of race or national origin. Herndon admits that a previous supervisor drove to his home to verify the legitimacy of a sick day, and that other officers have been similarly checked upon after calling in sick.
On June 22, Innes left his supervisory position and on July 2, he was placed on medical leave. He thus worked with Herndon for only one month (May 27 to June 22). In his deposition, Herndon acknowledged that he had only a few brief interactions with Innes during that one month.
In response to Herndon's complaint, Officer DeVilla, Deputy Chief Pat Slack, and Captain Pat Lee interviewed Innes. DeVilla and Deputy Chief Robert Stiles then interviewed seven other officers who were present at the June 8 briefing. None of the officers, including two who are Asian, reported discriminatory comments. DeVilla and Stiles jointly interviewed Herndon, who explicitly denied any harassment based on race or national origin. DeVilla and Stiles concluded that Innes had engaged in no misconduct and sent their report to Chief James Scharf. Scharf sent Herndon a memo describing the results of the investigation. Herndon was dissatisfied, and met with Scharf to discuss the issue. During this meeting, Herndon again stated he believed Innes' conduct was not motivated by race or national origin.
Herndon then filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging discrimination based on race and national origin. He contacted Sergeant White, who gave a statement on October 14, 1997. Contrary to the statement he gave during the departmental investigation, White told Herndon that Innes said, 'I want to go out to Herndon's and catch that little fucking gook working in his yard.' Clerk's Papers at 162. While pursuing the EEOC claim, Herndon learned that Innes had made racial or religious slurs directed against two other officers.
Innes told Officer Garcia that he might not pass a physical test due to his weight from eating so many tacos, that his golf tournament prize was two tacos, and, when Garcia was on the phone, Innes said he must have been calling his family in Tijuana. After learnin
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|