FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT N ove m be r 8, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 12803 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 0 0 7 1 6 - CV - 1 - W K W - SRW A N T H O N Y K E I T H , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s M G A , I N C ., an d al l H o l d i n g C o m p an i es a n d a f f ilia te d e n titie s , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e M i d d l e D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 8, 2006) B efo re B L A C K , M A R C U S an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

A ntho ny K ei th, an A fr i can A m er i can, appeal s an o rderof the di stri ctcourt th a t g r a n te d s u m m a ryju d g m e n t in f a v o ro f h is f o rm e re m p lo y e r , M G A , I n c . K e ith f i l e d ac om pl a i nta ga i ns tM G A i n w hi c h he a l l e ge d di s c r i m i na t oryt e rm i na t i on, 42 U . S . C . §§ 19 81 , 20 00 e- 2(a) (1); re t al i at ory t erm i nat i on , 42 U . S . C . § 2 00 0e-3(a) ; a nd hos t i l e w ork e nvi r onm e nt , 42 U . S . C . § 2000e - 2( a ) ( 1) . K e i th a l s o appe a l s the d e c is io n o f

th e d is tr ic t c o u rt to d e n y , in p a rt, h is m o tio n to c o m p e l d is c o v e ry . W e a f f i rm the gr a ntof

s um m a ryj udgm e nta nd hol d tha tK e i th i s unabl e t o appe a l the d en i al , i n p art , o f h i s m o t i o n t o co m p el d i sco v ery. I . B AC KG RO UN D I n 1 9 9 4 K e ith w a s h ir e d b yJ o e M a lu g e n , c o - f o u n d e ra n dC E O o f

M G A , to w ork a s al a w c l e rk i n the l e ga l de pa rtm e ntpe ndi ng K e i th’ s pa s s a ge of the A lab a m ab a r . K e ith f

a ile d th e b a ra n dw a s tr a n s f e rr e dto th e r e a l e s ta te d e p a rtm e n t, w h e r e h e w o rk e d u n til F e b ru a ry2 0 0 0 . D u r in g th a t tim e , K e ith r e c e iv e d f

iv e s e p a r a te p a yr a is e s . K e i th l e f tthe r e a l e s t a t e de pa rtm e nti n F e brua ry2000 w he n the pos i t i on of l egal as si st antw as cr ea t ed spec i al l y f or hi m . T hi s j ob w as no tpo st ed. In M ay 20 00 , K ei th w as gi ven ano ther payra i se . In A ug ust20 02 , K ei th w as transfe rr ed b a c kto th e r e a l e s ta te d e p a rtm e n t a n dg iv e n ap r o m o tio n a n da n $ 8 0 0 0 p a yr a is e . H e r e m a in e d in th e r e a l e s ta te d e p a rtm e n t u n til h is te rm in a tio n in 2 0 0 3 .3

O n n um er ou s occ as i on s duri ng K ei th’ s e m pl oym entatM G A , M al ug en pr ovi de d K e i th w i th pe r s ona l f i na nc i a l a s s i s t a nc e . M a l uge n pe r s ona l l ypa i d f or K e i th’ s w e ddi ng i n L a s V e ga s , w e ddi ng r e c e pt i on i n D otha n, A l aba m a , a nd ho neym oo n. M al ug en l etK ei th u se M al ug en’ s F l ori da l ake hou se on se vera l o c c a s io n s . M a lu g e n a ls o lo a n e d m o n e yto K e ith m o r e th a n o n c e . H e lo a n e dK e ith $7500 t o buyl a nd i n H e a dl a nd, A l aba m a , a nd $27, 000 t o c a m pa i gn f orthe A lab a m aH o u s e o f

R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s , b u t n e ith e ro f th e s e lo a n s w e r e r e p a id . M alu g en also d o n ated $ 1 0 0 0 , at K eith ’s re q u es t, to th e c h u rc h atten d ed b y K eith ’s m other. O n tw o o c c a s io n s in la te 2 0 0 0 , K e ith r e c e iv e dw a rn in g s a f te rf e m a le e m p lo y e e s o f

M G A c o m p la in e d th a t h e s e n t th e m s e x u a llyin ap p r o p r ia te e - m a ils . O n S e p te m b e r2 7 , K e ith r e c e iv e dav e rb a l r e p r im a n df o rs e n d in g o n e s u c h e - m a il. L es s than tw o w ee ks l at erK ei th sentanother. H e then rece i ved a form al w ri tt en w a rn in g th a t s ta te d , a m o n g o th e rth in g s , th a t f u tu r e v io la tio n s o f

th is s o rt “c o u ld re sul ti n i m m edi at e t erm i nat i on . ” O n sever alocca si on s duri ng hi s e m pl oym entw i th M G A , K ei th com pl ai ned o f r a c ia l d is c r im in a tio n . I n 1 9 9 6 o r1 9 9 7 , h e c o m p la in e dto M a lu g e n ab o u t a prom ot i on another e m pl oyee re ce i ved and abou tthe com pensat i on of a bl ac k fe m al e e m pl oyee . In 19 99 , he com pl ai ned t o M al ug en thatw hi t e e m pl oyee s w er e4

b e in g p r o m o te d to p o s itio n s n o t p o s te dw ith in th e c o m p a n y . I n 2 0 0 0 , h e a g a in com pl ai ned abo utra ci al di spar i t i es . A roun d 2 00 2, K ei th spo ke w i th M al ug en abou tthe l ac k o f bl ac k execut i ves a tM G A . A nd i n Jul y 200 3, K ei th w rot e al ett er t o M a l uge n c om pl a i ni ng aboutr a c i a l di s pa r i t i e s a tM G A w i th r e ga r d t o pa ya nd pr om ot i on. T h i s l a s tc o m p l a i n tp r o m p t e dMGA t o l au n c h a n i n t e rn a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n . As pa rtof tha ti nve s t i ga t i on K e i th pr ovi de d C hr i s t aF orr e s t e r , i n- hous e c ouns e l f or M G A , w i th a l i stof em pl oyee s he bel i eved m i gh tsupp orthi s c harges of ra ci al di s c r i m i na t i on. O ne of

thos e e m pl oy e e s , N i c ol e W i l ki ns on, s t a t e d s he di d notha ve any c on ce rns abo utra ci al di sc ri m i nat i on atM G A , bu tw enton t o com pl ai n that K ei th h ad subj ec t ed her and other f em al e e m pl oyee s t o u nw ant ed cond uctof a s e x u a l n a tu r e . W ilk in s o n p r o v id e dF o rr e s te rw ith th e n a m e s o f o th e rf e m a le e m p lo y e e s s h e b e lie v e d h a d b e e n h a r a s s e db yK e ith . F o rr e s te ra n dK a r la M c C o rm ic k , th e h u m a n r e s o u r c e s d ir e c to rf o rM G A , p r o c e e d e dto in v e s tig a te W i l ki nson ’ s c l ai m s, and spo ke w i th three other f em al e e m pl oyee s w ho com pl ai ned ab o u t u n w a n te d s e x u a l b e h a v io rb yK e ith . A ft erspeaki ng w i th these em pl oyee s, F orre st erre com m ended thatM al ug en f i r e K e i th. M G A ha d pr e vi ous l yt e rm i na t e d 22 e m pl oy e e s a f t e ra l l e ga t i ons of s e xua l ha r a s s m e nt . M a l uge n r e vi e w e d the w r i tt e n s t a t e m e nt s s ubm i tt e d bythe5

f e m a l e e m pl oy e e s a nd the pr e vi ous r e pr i m a nds K e i th ha d r e c e i ve d f orvi ol a t i ng the co m p an y e-m ai l p o l i cy. O n N o v em b er 5 , 2 0 0 3 , M al u g en fi red K ei th . E i g h td ays la te r , K e ith f

ile d ac h a r g e w ith th e E q u a l E m p lo y m e n t O p p o rtu n ityC o m m is s io n in w hi c h he a l l e ge d tha the ha d be e n t e rm i na t e d be c aus e of hi s r a c e a nd i n r e t a l i a t i on f o rc o m p la in in g ab o u t d is c r im in a tio n , a n dth a t h e h a db e e n s u b je c te dto ah o s tile w o rke n v ir o n m e n t. T h a t c h a r g e w a s d is m is s e do n M a y5 , 2 0 0 4 . O n J ul y27, 2004, K e i th f i l e d ac om pl a i nti n f

e de r a l di s tr i c tc ourtr a i s i ng the s a m e a l l e ga t i ons . K e i th f i l e d am ot i on t o c om pe l the pr oduc t i on of e - m a i l s f

r om ei gh tM G A exec ut i ves. T he m agi stra t e j ud ge deni ed the m ot i on i n p artbu tordered M G A t o pr oduc e thos e e - m a i l s tha t , l i ke K e i th’ s , r e s ul t e d i n c om pl a i nt s f r om the em p l o yees w h o recei v ed th em . M G A l at er m o v ed fo r su m m ary j u d g m en tag ai n st al l of K ei th’ s c l ai m s. T he di stri ctcourtgrant ed the m ot i on and con cl ud ed that K e ith h a d n o t m a d e ap r im af a c ie s h o w in g o n a n yo f

h is c la im s . I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW W e r evi ew a grantof sum m ary j ud gm entde no vo . B re da v. W ol f C am er a & V id e o , 2 2 2 F .3 d 8 8 6 , 8 8 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . W e r e v ie w th e r e c o r da n dd r a w a ll in f e r e n c e s f r o m it in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to th e n o n - m o v in g p a rty . I d . A d e n ia l o f am o tio n to c o m p e l d is c o v e ryis r e v ie w e df o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . S a n d e r lin v . S e m in o le T r ib e o f F la ., 2 4 3 F .3 d1 2 8 2 , 1 2 8 5 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) .6 I I I . DI S CUS S I ON K e i th m a ke s tw o a r gum e nt s on appe a l . F i r s t , K e i th a r gue s tha the es t abl i shed a pri m a f

ac i e c as e of di sc ri m i nat ory t erm i nat i on , re t al i at ory t erm i nat i on , and a ho st i l e w ork env i ronm ent . S ec on d, K ei th argues thatthe di stri ct c o u rt e rr e d w h e n it d e n ie d , in p a rt, h is m o tio n to c o m p e l d is c o v e ry . E a c h is s u e is a ddr e s s e d i n turn.

A . Ke i th Fai le d to P r e s e nt a P r i m a Fac i e Cas e of D iscri m i n a t i o n , R eta l i a t i o n , o r a H o st i le W o rk E n v ir o n m e n t. K e ith b r in g s c la im s u n d e rb o th T itle V I I a n d4 2 U .S .C . s e c tio n 1 9 8 1 . Be c au s e th e s e c l a i ms “ h a v e th e s a me r e q u i r e me n t s o f p r o o f a n du s e th e s a me a na l y t i c a l f

r a m e w ork, ” w e w i l l “ e xpl i c i t l ya ddr e s s the T i t l e V I I c l a i m w i th the unde r s t a ndi ng tha tthe a na l y s i s appl i e s t o the § 1981 c l a i m a s w e l l . ” S t a nda r d v. A . B . E . L . S ervi ce s, Inc. , 16 1 F . 3d 13 18 , 13 30 (11th C i r. 19 98 ). K ei th p re se nt ed o n l yc i r c u m s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o rto f h i s c o m p l a i n t , a n dh e a s k s th a twe eval uat e hi s e vi dence und erthe M cD on nel l D ou gl as bu rden-s hi ft i ng t es t . S ee M cD on nel l D ou gl as C orp. v. G re en, 41 1 U . S . 79 2, 93 S . C t . 18 17 (197 3). U nd er thi s t e s t , K e i th ha d the i ni t i a l bur de n of e s t abl i s hi ng apr i m af

a c i e c a s e f

ore a c h of hi s c l a i m s . I d. a t802; 93 S . C t . a t1824. K e ith f a ile d to e s tab lis h ap r im af a c ie c a s e o f

d is c r im in a to ryte rm in a tio n . A7

pr i m af a c i e c a s e r e qui r e s tha tapl a i nt i f f pr e s e nte vi de nc e tha t( 1) he be l ongs t o a prot ec t ed cl as s; (2) he w as subj ec t ed t o an adv er se em pl oym entac t i on ; (3) he w as qu al i fi ed t o d o the j ob ; and (4) hi s e m pl oyertre at ed si m i l ar l y s i tuat ed em pl oyee s out s i de hi s c l a s s i f

i c a t i on m or e f

a vor abl y . W i l s on v. B / E A e r os pa c e , I nc . , 376 F . 3d 1 0 7 9 , 1 0 9 1 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o rr e c tlyc o n c lu d e dth a t th is f o u rth el em entre qu i re d K ei th t o est abl i sh thatsi m i l ar l y s i tuat ed no n-A fr i can A m er i can e m p lo y e e s w e r e r e ta in e d d e s p ite th e f a c t th a t c o m p la in ts a lle g in g s e x u a lly i nappr opr i a t e be ha vi orw e r e m a de a ga i ns tthe m . S e e M a ni c c i av. B r ow n, 171 F . 3d 1 3 6 4 , 1 3 6 8 (1 1 th C ir. 1 9 9 9 ) ( “[T ]h e q u an ti ty an dq u ality o f th e c o m p ar ato r’s m i s c onduc t[ m us t ] be ne a r l yi de nt i c a l t o pr e ve ntc ourt s f r om s e c ond- gue s s i ng e m p lo y e r s ’ r e a s o n ab le d e c is io n s [ .]” ) . K e ith f a ile dto p r o d u c e a n ye v id e n c e o f th is ki nd. K e ith a ls o f

a ile d to e s tab lis h ap r im af a c ie c a s e o f

r e ta lia to ryte rm in a tio n . A p r im af a c ie c a s e r e q u ir e s th a t ap la in tif f s h o w “( 1 ) h e e n g a g e din s ta tu to r ily p r o te c te d a c tiv ity ; ( 2 ) h e s u f f e r e d a n a d v e r s e e m p lo y m e n t a c tio n ; a n d( 3 ) th e r e is s om e c aus a l c onne c t i on be tw e e n the tw o e ve nt s . ” O l m s t e d v. T a c o B e l l C orp. , 141 F .3 d 1 4 5 7 , 1 4 6 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) . K e ith p r e s e n te dn o e v id e n c e in s u p p o rt o f th is th ir d r e q u ir e m e n t. H e w a s f ir e d f o u rm o n th s a f

te rm a k in g th e J u ly2 0 0 3 c o m p la in t, and i n the abse nce of any other c ausa l evi dence, a f ou r- m on th g ap cann ot , by i t se l f,8

e s t abl i s h tha tK e i th w a s f i r e d be c aus e of

the c om pl a i nt . S e e H i gdon v. J a c ks on, 393 F . 3d 1211, 1220- 21 ( 11th C i r . 2004) ; c f . C l a rk C ountyS c hool D i s tr i c tv. B r e e de n, 532 U . S . 268, 273, 121 S . C t . 1508, 1511 ( 2001) . K e i th c om pl a i ne d of di s c r i m i na t i on on s e ve r a l othe roc c a s i ons , y e tc ont i nue d t o r e c e i ve pr om ot i ons a nd pa yr a i s e s a f

t e rthos e c om pl a i nt s . T hi s e vi de nc e f urthe rm i l i t a t e s a ga i ns tf i ndi ng a c aus a l l i nk be tw e e n the J ul y2003 c om pl a i nta nd hi s t e rm i na t i on. F i nal l y, K ei th fai l ed t o est abl i sh a pri m a c as e of host i l e w ork e nvi r onm e nt . A pr i m af a c i e c a s e r e qui r e s tha tapl a i nt i f f pr e s e nte vi de nc e tha t( 1) h e b e lo n g s to ap r o te c te d g r o u p ; ( 2 ) h e h a s b e e n s u b je c t to u n w e lc o m e h a r a s s m e n t; (3) the haras sm entw as base d o n a prot ec t ed chara ct er i st i c; (4) the haras sm ent“ w as s uf f i c i e nt l ys e ve r e orpe rva s i ve [ a s ] t o a l t e rthe t e rm s orc ondi t i ons of e m pl oy m e nt and creat e adi sc ri m i nat ori l y abu si ve w orki ng envi ronm ent ; ” and (5) the em pl oyer i s e i the rdi r e c t l yorvi c a r i ous l yr e s pons i bl e f ors uc h e nvi r onm e nt . M i l l e rv. K enw orth o f D othan, Inc. , 27 7 F . 3d 12 69 , 12 75 (11th C i r. 20 02 ). K ei th p re se nt ed no e vi de nc e of

s e ve r e orpe rva s i ve ha r a s s m e nt . K e i th a r gue s tha ta l l of the e xe c ut i ve s of

M G A a r e w hi t e , the r e i s no f orm a l pl a n orpr ogr a m f orr e c rui t i ng m i nor i tye m pl oy e e s , a nd M G A r e f us e d t o pr oduc e the r e s um e s of i t s m a na ge m e nt a nd e xe c ut i ve s , butthi s a r gum e ntf a i l s . K e i th r e c e i ve d m ul t i pl e pr om ot i ons a nd pa yr a i s e s , ha d a n unpos t e d j ob c r e a t e d s pe c i a l l yf orhi m , a nd ne ve ra l l e ge d tha the9

w a s s ubj e c t e d t o r a c i a l s l ur s , phy s i c a l thr e a t s , orothe rha r a s s m e nttha tm i ght in te r f e r e w ith p e r f

o rm a n c e o f

h is d u tie s . B . Ke ith W

a iv e d A n yA r g u m e n t A b o u t th e D e n ia l, in P a r t, of His M ot i on to C om

pel D isc over

y. K ei th fai l ed t o p re se rve hi s r em ai ni ng ar gu m entabou tdi sc ov ery. F eder al R ul e of C i vi l P r oc e dur e 72( a ) s t a t e s , “ W i thi n 10 da y s a f t e rbe i ng s e rve d w i th a c opyof [ a ] m a gi s tr a t e j udge ’ s or de r , apa rtym a ys e rve a nd f i l e obj e c t i ons t o the o rd er ; a p ar ty m ay n o t th er ea fteras sig n as erro r a d ef ec t i n th e m ag istrate ju d g e’s order[ . ] ” A ft erM agi stra t e Jud ge W al ker deni ed, i n p art , K ei th’ s m ot i on t o com pel di s c ove ry , K e i th f

a i l e d t o obj e c tw i thi n the a l l ott e d pe r i od. K e i th w a i ve d hi s r i ght t o com pl ai n thatthe m agi stra t e j ud ge abused her di sc re t i on . S ee M ay nard v. B oard o f R e g e n ts , 3 4 2 F .3 d 1 2 8 1 , 1 2 8 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . I V . CONCL US I ON T h e o r d e ro f

th e d is tr ic t c o u rt g r a n tin g s u m m a ryju d g m e n t f o rM G A is AF F I RME D.