Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-04093/USCOURTS-ca10-92-04093-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

FIL ... .J _u nited States Cou-t of Appea~ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPE~ Tenth Circuit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT MAR 1 6 1993 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk BETTY L. STOKES, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

AMERICAN EXPRESS CO . ; AMERICAN EXPRESS ) 

TRAVEL RELATED SERVICES, INC.; MARIE T. ) 

GRILLO, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

No. 92-4093 

(D.C. No. 90-CV-211 ) 

(D. Utah) 

Before TACHA and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges, and BROWN,** Senior 

District Judge. 

**Honorable Wesley E. Brown, Senior District Judge, United States 

District Court for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has detennined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the detennination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel . 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 92-4093 Document: 010110191121 Date Filed: 03/16/1993 Page: 1 
Plaintiff Betty L. Stokes appeals from an order of the 

district court granting defendants' motion for summary judgment in 

this action brought pursuant to Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 

§§ 2000e-2000e -17 . Upon review of the record, the parties' briefs 

on appeal, and the applicable law, we affirm, although, in part, 

on different grounds than those relied upon by the district court. 

See Burk v . K Mart Cor_p . , 956 F.2d 213, 214 (10th Cir. 1991). 

In her complaint, plaintiff alleged that defendants, in 

particular defendant Grillo, her immediate supervisor, sexually 

harassed her, discriminated against her on the basis of her age, 

and retaliated against her because she declined Ms . Grillo's 

sexual advances. As a result, plaintiff alleged she was 

wrongfully discharged and caused severe emotional distress. 

We review the district court's grant of summary judgment de 

nova, applying the same legal standard used by the district court. 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c ) ; Applied Genetics Int'l, Inc. v. First 

Affiliated Sec., Inc . , 912 F.2d 1238, 1241 (10th Cir. 1990). 

On appeal, plaintiff contests the district court's 

determination that she was not subjected to either quid pro quo 

sexual harassment or a hostile worki ng environment due to sexual 

harassment . The district court, addressing plaintiff's sexual 

harassment claims on the merits, held that while plaintiff had 

made a prima facie showi ng of sexual discrimination, she had not 

met he r burden of showing that the legitimate business reasons 

offered by defendants for their actions were pretextual. 

2 

Appellate Case: 92-4093 Document: 010110191121 Date Filed: 03/16/1993 Page: 2 
Defendants argue that the merits of this claim were decided 

in plaintiff's state workers' compensation claim and the state 

court's judgment is, therefore, binding on this court . We agree. 

The Supreme Court has held that Congress did not intend that 

Title VII should supersede the principles of comity and repose as 

embodied in 28 U.S.C. § 1738. 1 Kremer v. Chemical Constr. Corn., 

456 U.S. 461, 478 (1982). 

In her workers' compensation action, plaintiff alleged she 

was mentally and physically disabled as a result of sexual 

harassment in the workplace. Benefits were denied based on the 

finding that the alleged incidents had not occurred. Plaintiff 

appealed to the Utah Court of Appeals, which affirmed. See Stokes 

v. Board of Review of Indus. Comm'n, 832 P.2d 56 (Utah Ct. App . 

1992) . 

We are bound by this determination if the principle of issue 

preclusion applies. Issue preclusion "prevents the relitigation 

of issues that have been once litigated and determined in another 

action even though the claims for relief in the two actions may be 

different. 11 Penrod v. Nu Creation Creme, Inc., 669 P.2d 873, 875 

(Utah 1983) . See Kremer, 456 U.S. at 481-82 (federal court must 

look to state law to determine the effect of state judgment). 

The Utah Supreme Court has held that the following factors 

are to be examined in determining if issue preclusion applies: 

1 28 U.S.C. § 1738 provides that the record and judicial 

proceedings of any state court "shall have the same full faith and 

credit in every court within the United States . as they have 

by law or usage in the courts of such State ... from which they 

are taken. " 

3 

Appellate Case: 92-4093 Document: 010110191121 Date Filed: 03/16/1993 Page: 3 
1. Was the issue decided 

adjudication identical with the one 

action in question? 

in the 

presented 

prior 

in the 

2 . Was there a final judgment on the merits? 

3. Was the party against whom the plea is 

asserted a party or in privity with a party to the prior 

adjudication? 

4. Was the issue in the first case competently, 

fully, and fairly litigated? 

Copper State Thrift & Loan v . Bruno, 735 P.2d 387, 389 (Utah Ct. 

App. 1987) . 

The issue of whether sexual harassment occurred is the same 

in both actions. See Stokes, 832 P . 2d at 62 (issue of whether 

plaintiff's allegations of sexual harassment had actually occurred 

correctly reached because incidents were central to disability 

claim) . The state appellate court entered final judgment 

upholding the Industrial Commission's determination on the merits 

that plaintiff had not been sexually harassed and that 

disciplinary procedures involving her had been handled 

appropriately in accordance with company procedures. The employer 

was a party in the state proceeding. Plaintiff's immediate 

supervisor, Ms. Grillo, while not a named party there, is in 

privity with the employer . The issue was competently, fully, and 

fairly litigated. Evidence was taken for seven days, testimony of 

nine witnesses was heard, and several volumes of medical and 

psychological reports were examined. Id. at 57, 59-60. 

Therefore, plaintiff's Title VII claim for sexual harassment 

is barred due to issue preclusion. Plaintiff's derivative claims 

of retaliation and constructive discharge are likewise barred. 

4 

Appellate Case: 92-4093 Document: 010110191121 Date Filed: 03/16/1993 Page: 4 
Petitioner argues that she proved her age discrimination 

claim. The district court found an insufficient basis to support 

this claim and held that defendants' stated reason for not 

including plaintiff in a specialized training program was a 

facially valid business reason which plaintiff failed to rebut. 

Upon review of the record, we agree with the district court that 

plaintiff failed to present credible evidence sufficient to create 

a genuine issue of material fact which would thereby preclude the 

entry of summary judgment in favor of defendants. 

Plaintiff also argues that the Utah Workers' Compensation Act 

does not bar her emotional distress claim. We disagree . An 

action for emotional distress can only be brought in a state 

workers' compensation action unless the plaintiff can show 

intentional infliction of emotional distress. Mounteer v. Utah 

Power & Light Co., 823 P.2d 1055, 1058 - 59 (Utah 1991) . 

has made no such showing here. 

Plaintiff 

The judgment of the United States District Court for the 

District of Utah is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff's motion to supplement 

the record is DENIED. Defendants' motion to strike is GRANTED . 

Entered for the Court 

De anell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

5 

Appellate Case: 92-4093 Document: 010110191121 Date Filed: 03/16/1993 Page: 5