Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-5_13-cv-00387/USCOURTS-ared-5_13-cv-00387-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

PINE BLUFF DIVISION 

KEYYONNA PENISTER PLAINTIFF 

v. No. 5:13-cv-387-DPM 

CITY OF PINE BLUFF, ARKANSAS; DEBE 

HOLLINGSWORTH, Mayor, Individually and in Her 

Official Capacity; JEFF HUBANKS, Chief of Police, 

Individually and in His Official Capacity; MICHAEL 

SWEENEY, Police Officer, Individually and in His 

Official Capacity; and CHRIS POWELL, Individually DEFENDANTS 

ORDER 

1. InJ anuary 2013, Officer Keyyonna Penister was training to be a police 

officer with the Pine Bluff Police Department. She alleges that for a week her 

field training officer, Chris Powell, created a hostile work environment by 

sexually harassing her. Penister has pleaded several claims against the city, 

the mayor, Powell, officer Michael Sweeney, and the chief of police. NQ 21. In 

her summary judgment papers, though, Penister has abandoned all her claims 

except sexual harassment. Satcher v. University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff Board 

ofTrustees, 558 F .3d 731, 734-35 (8th Cir. 2009). Her harassment claim against 

Powell fails as a matter of law because individuals are not liable under Title 

VII or the Arkansas Civil Rights Act. Schoffstall v. Henderson, 223 F.3d 818, 821 

Case 5:13-cv-00387-DPM Document 51 Filed 08/19/15 Page 1 of 4
n.2 (8th Cir. 2000); Davis v. KARK-TV, Inc., 421 F.3d 699, 703-04 (8th Cir. 

2005). Penister doesn't claim that officer Sweeney sexually harassed her. 

What remains is a harassment claim against the city, the mayor, and the chief 

of police. The Court takes the material facts, where genuinely disputed, in 

Penister's favor. Nitsche v. CEO of Osage Valley Electric Co-operative, 446 F.3d 

841, 845 (8th Cir. 2006). 

2. Penister works for the Pine Bluff Police Department. When she was 

training in January 2013, she spent two weeks at a time with different field 

training officers. One of these officers was Chris Powell. Penister worked 

with Powell from January 7th to January 13th. During this week, Powell 

made sexual comments to her, showed her pictures of women in underwear 

and heels, and asked her out for dinner and drinks. 

On January 9th Penister text-messaged sergeant Neal, her former field 

training officer, noting that Powell had made some sexual comments to her. 

Sergeant Neal threatened to report Powell, but Penister said that she had it 

under control. Sergeant Neal told her to alert him as soon as she thought 

Powell had crossed the line. 

-2-

Case 5:13-cv-00387-DPM Document 51 Filed 08/19/15 Page 2 of 4
On January 13th Penister took pictures of Powell touching her on the 

shoulder, neck, and face. She sent the pictures to sergeant Neal with the 

phrase ~~Powell is crossing the line!!!!". N2 33-14. Sergeant Neal reported the 

harassment that day, N2 33-15; Powell was suspended that same day, N2 33-

17; and Penister was placed with a new field training officer on her next work 

day. An investigation of Powell ensued; and he was eventually fired. 

3. The Pine Bluff Police Department took immediate, remedial action. 

Vajdl v. Mesabi Academy ofKidsPeace, Inc., 484 F .3d 546, 550 (8th Cir. 2007). The 

initial exchange between Penister and sergeant Neal January 9th did not make 

the Pine Bluff Police Department aware of sexual harassment. Penister said 

she had Powell's unacceptable behavior under control, which stopped inquiry 

by sergeant Neal. When Penister reported that Powell had finally crossed the 

line on January 13th, the Department's system worked. She and Powell were 

separated. The circumstances were investigated. And Powell was disciplined 

in due course. Penister's claim fails as a matter of law because it is 

undisputed that the Department cured the hostile work environment 

immediately after Powell sought a remedy. E.E.O.C. v. CRST Van Expedited, 

Inc., 679 F.3d 657, 692-93 (8th Cir. 2012). 

-3-

Case 5:13-cv-00387-DPM Document 51 Filed 08/19/15 Page 3 of 4
* * * 

Motions for summary judgment, NQ 29 & NQ 32, granted. 

So Ordered. 

-4-

(/ 

D.P. Marshall Jr. 

United States District Judge 

Case 5:13-cv-00387-DPM Document 51 Filed 08/19/15 Page 4 of 4