2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 8-1-2005 

# S cott v . S t ate of N J P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-3446

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" S c ott v . S t at e of N J " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 761. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/761NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT
N o. 04- 3446
L OR I S CO T T ; DAVI D J ONE S ; AL AN DE NNI S ; AB UB AKR S ADI Q; T Y R O N E L E A K ; W IL L IA M W A S H IN G T O N ; H E R B E R T B A C O N ; P IE R C E G R A H A M ; JO Y H IL L ; G R E G O R Y S P IN N E R ; H A T H A B A R A K A ; J OAN B AT E S ; T RE VOR T ODD; RO BE RT NE L S ON; GE RA RD S CH E NC K;

RU S S E L L P E T E RS ON; M I CH AE L L ANE

v. STA TE O F N EW J ER SEY ; N EW J ER SEY D EPA RT M EN T O F CO RR EC TI O N S; J A C K T E R H U N E ; ST E V E N PI N C H A K , A dm i ni s tr at orof EastJ er s ey St at e Pr i s on; PA T R I C K A R V O N I O ; ST E V E N M A G G I , C hi ef of C orr ect i onal O ffi cer s E as tJ er s eySt at e Pr i s on; J O H N D O E S 1- 20

T yr one Leak, A l an D enn i s, A p p e llan ts APP EAL F ROM THE UNI TE D ST ATE S DI S TRI CT C OURT

FOR TH E DI STRI CT O F NEW J ERSEY D . C . C i vi l N o. 99- cv- 01099 D i s tr i ctJ udge: T he H onor abl e W i l l i am J. M art i ni Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J ul y1, 2005
B efor e: R O T H , R E N D E L L , and B A R R Y , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on Fi l ed: A ugus t1, 2005)T h e re m a in in g p lain tiff s s e ttl e d th e ir c laim s a n d a re n o lo n g e r p a rties to th is 1 l i t i gat i on. 2 OP I NI ON

B A R R Y , C i r cui tJ udge A tal l t i m es r el evantt o thi s l i t i gat i on, pl ai nt i ffs T yr one Leak ( “Leak”) and A l an D enni s ( “D enni s ”) w er e empl oy ed as corr ect i ons offi cer s atthe EastJ er s eySt at e Pr i s on (“E JS P ”), a fa cil ityo p era ted b ythe N ew Jerse yD ep artm en t of C o rrecti o n s (“D O C ”). 1 L eak a nd D enni s al l ege thatthe St at e of N ew J er s eyand the D O C , al ong w i th var i ous in d iv id u a l d e f

e n d a n ts, c re a ted a n d m a in tain e d a ra c iallyh o stile w o rk e n v iro n m e n t, d iscri m inated ag ains t black co rrecti o n s o ff icers, and en g ag ed in a v arietyo f re tal iat o ry a c ts in d ire c t re sp o n se to th e f ili n g o f th is la w su it. T h e yso u g h t re d re ss p u rsu a n t to T itl e V I I of the C i vi l R i ght s A ctof 1964 and N ew J er s ey ’ s L aw A gai ns tD i s cr i m i nat i on (“LA D ”), am on g o ther federal and st at e st atutes . L eak a nd D enni s now appea l fr om or der s of the D i s tr i ctC our tdat ed M ay24, 2004 and J ul y26, 2004, w hi ch gr ant ed s um m aryj udgm enti n favorof def endant s and deni ed p lain tiff s’ m o tio n f

o r re c o n sid e ra tio n , res p e c tiv e ly . F o r th e re a so n s s e t f o rth b e lo w , b o th
or der s w i l l be af

fi r m ed. I. B e c a u se w e w rite o n lyf o r th e p a rties , w e w ill lim it o u r d isc u ss io n o f th e f a c ts to3

thos e w hi ch ar e pert i nentt o ouranal y s i s . C entr al t o the compl ai ntpl ai nt i ffs fi l ed i n the D i s tr i ctC our ti s the al l egat i on thatdefe ndantSt even M aggi , the C hi ef of C orr ect i onal O f f ice rs a t E JS P (“ C h ief

M a g g i”) , m a in tain e d a ra c ially -in f lam m a to ryd isp lay on h is offi ce w al l . T hi s di s pl aycons i s t ed of a s m al l dol l , a s tr aw hat , and a mi ni atur e w ooden
c o f f i n , b e n e a th wh i c h wa s t a p e d a h a n d wr i t t e n n o t e r e a d i n g “ NO N I GGERS A L L O W E D . ” Phot ogr aphs of the di s pl ay , t aken byL eak, ar e i ncl uded i n the r ecor d. L eak a nd D enni s do notal l ege thatC hi ef M aggi hi m s el f ei therarr anged the i t ems or w r ot e the not e. T heydo, how ever , cl ai m thatC hi ef M aggi w as aw ar e of the di s pl ay , and th a t n e ith e r h e n o r a n yo th e r su p e rv iso r a t E JS P to o k ste p s to re m o v e it fro m th e w a ll befor e thi s l aw s ui tw as fi l ed. D ef en d an ts ad m itthat the d o ll , h at, an d co ff in w ere loca ted in C h ief M ag g i’ s o f f ice ; in d e e d , the p a rties stip u late d th a t all th re e o f th e item s w e re g if

ts p re se n ted to C h ie f M a g g i o n v a ri o u s o c c a s io n s b ym in o ri ty co rr e c tio n s o f f ic e rs a n d in m a te s . D efe ndant s cont end, how ever , thatL eak manufac tur ed the off ens i ve di s pl ayby
re a rra n g in g th e item s a n d g ro u p in g th e m a lo n g sid e th e n o te, w h ich a c c o rd in g to d e f e n d a n ts w a s its e lf

a f a b ri c a tio n . H e th e n p h o to g ra p h e d h is h a n d iw o rk . Pl ai nt i ffs ’ r emai ni ng cl ai m s ar i s e fr om event s w hi ch occ urr ed af t erthey
comm ence d thi s l aw s ui t . I n the mont hs fol l ow i ng the fi l i ng of thei rcompl ai nt , both L eak and D enni s fi l ed a s er i es of cha r ges w i th the Equal E m pl oym entD i vi s i on ( “EE D ”) , anPl ai nt i ffs fi l ed thei rcompl ai nton M ar ch 11, 1999. B etw een M ar ch 27 and J une 1, 2 1999, D enni s fi l ed s even c har ges w i th E E D . B etw een M ar ch 26 and Sept ember8, 1999, L e a k f ile d th re e s u c h c h a rg e s . 4 i nves t i gat i ve arm of the D O C r es pons i bl e forcombat i ng di s cr i m i nat orybehavi or . A l l of 2 the s e c ha r ge s a r os e fr om i nc i de nt s w hi c h a l l e ge dl yoc c urr e d a tEJ SP ori nv ol ve d EJ SP offi cer s , and al l w er e i nves t i gat ed byE E D . E E D found thatther e w as i ns uffi ci ent e v id e n c e to su p p o rt th e c h a rg e s. T h e re a f ter , L e a k a n d D e n n is a m e n d e d th e ir c o m p lain t to al l ege thatthe i nci dent s themsel ves , as w el l as E E D ’ s r epea t ed fi ndi ngs thatthei rchar ges w er e uns ubs t ant i at ed, r epr es ent ed a c oncert ed ef for tt o t ar getthem i n r et al i at i on forfi l i ng th is la w su it. II. A . Sum m ary Ju dgm ent St andard Ou rr e v i e w o f

a g r a n to f

s u mma ryj u d g me n ti s p l e n a ry , a n d we a p p l yth e s a me lega l st an d ard as th e d istri ct co u rt . S alda n a v . K m art C o rp., 2 6 0 F . 3 d 2 2 8 , 2 3 1 (3d C ir . 2001) . Sum m aryj udgm enti s appr opr i at e w hen ther e exi s t s “no genui ne i s s ue of mat er i al fac tand . . . the movi ng partyi s ent i t l ed t o a j udgm entas a mat t erof l aw . ” Fed. R . C i v. P . 5 6 (c ). A f

a c tu a l d isp u te is d e e m e d g e n u in e if “ th e e v id e n c e is s u c h th a t a r e a so n a b le ju ry c o u ld re tu rn a v e rd ic t f o r t h e n o n m o v in g p a rt y .” A n d e rs o n v . L ib e rt yL o b b y , In c ., 4 7 7 U .S . 2 4 2 , 2 4 8 (1 9 8 6 ). A t th is s tag e o f th e p ro c e e d in g s, w e m u st v iew th e re c o rd in th e lig h t m o st f

a v o ra b le to L e a k a n d D e n n is, a n d d ra w f ro m th e re c o rd a n yre a so n a b le i nfer ence s w hi ch s uppor tthei rcl ai m s . D ebi ec v. C abotC orp. , 352 F. 3d 117, 128 n. 3 ( 3dIn o rd e r f o r a n e m p lo y e r to b e liab le u n d e r a h o stile w o rk e n v iro n m e n t th e o ry , a T itl e 3 V I I pl ai nt i ff mustpr ove that : ( 1) he ors he s uffe r ed i nt ent i onal di s cr i m i nat i on beca us e of hi s orherr ace ors ex; ( 2) the di s cr i m i nat i on w as pervas i ve and r egul ar ; ( 3) the di s cr i m i nat i on detr i m ent al l yaff ect ed the pl ai nt i ff; ( 4) the di s cr i m i nat i on w oul d have detr i m ent al l yaff

ect ed a r eas onabl e per s on of the s ame r ace ors ex, i n l i ke pos i t i on; and ( 5) a bas i s forr es pondeats uper i orl i abi l i ty . See K uni n v. Sear s R oebuck Co. , 175 F. 3d 289, 293 ( 3d C i r . 1999) ( ci t i ng A ndr ew s v. C i tyof Phi l adel phi a, 895 F. 2d 1469, 1482 ( 3d C ir . 1 9 9 0 )). 5 C i r . 2003) . L eak a nd D enni s m aynot , how ever , s ur vi ve s um m aryj udgm entbyr el y i ng on the al l egat i ons cont ai ned i n t hei rpl eadi ngs ; i ns t ead, theyar e r equi r ed t o demonstr at e, thr ough aff

i davi t s orot herr el i abl e evi dence , a s uffi ci entfac tual bas i s t o pr es enta genui ne i s s ue fortr i al . Sal dana, 260 F. 3d at232. B . H o stile W o r k E n v iro n m e n t C la im L eak a nd D enni s cl ai m thatthe di s pl ayi n C hi ef M aggi ’ s offi ce ge ner at ed an act i onabl e hos t i l e w or k envi r onm entw i thi n the meani ng of Ti t l e V I I . W hi l e w e have no 3 doubtthats uch a pa t ent l yoffe ns i ve di s pl aycoul d be ac t i onabl e underdi ffe r ent c irc u m sta n c e s, w e a g re e w ith th e D istric t C o u rt th a t “L e a k a n d D e n n is h a v e f a iled to cr edi bl ycont es tD efe ndant s ’ overtacc us at i ons of fr aud, ” Scottv. N ew J er s ey , N o. 99- 10 99 , sl i p o p. at17 (D . N . J. M ay24 , 20 04 ), and w e w i l l affirm on that basi s. I n s uppor tof thei rm ot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent , defe ndant s s ubm i t t ed the depos i t i on t es t i m onyof tw o corr ect i ons offi cer s atE J SP, eac h of w hom cl ai m s thatL eak fabr i cat ed, and then phot ogr aphed, the di s pl ay . O ffi cerV i ct orM oor e w i tnes s ed Leak
w r i t i ng a not e w hi ch s ai d “ni gger s notal l ow ed” w hi l e i ns i de C hi ef M aggi ’ s offi ce, andA ccor di ng t o J acks on, L eak s ubs equent l yi nduced hi m t o acc om panyL eak t o an 4 att orney ’ s offi ce w her e Leak and the att orneyr evi ew ed the phot ogr aphs and di s cus s ed the p o te n tia l la w s u it. 6 then phot ogr aphi ng i tal ongs i de the dol l , hat , and cof fi n. O ffi cerB arryJ acks on t es t i fi ed that , aft erarr angi ng the i t ems on C hi ef M aggi ’ s w al l , he s aw L eak t ake a not e cont ai ni ng the s ame r aci al epi thetoutof hi s pocketand add i tt o the di s pl ay . L eak l at ert ol d J acks on that h e h ad p h o tog rap h ed the d isplayan d that h is go al w as to g en era te ev iden ce to su p p o rt
a p lan n e d law su it: I s te p p e d to th e d o o r o f th e c h ie f ’s o f

f ic e a n d [ L e a k ] g a v e m e th e s to ry. L ook, I gotan i dea f

orthi s m i l l i on dol l arl aw s ui t . I ’ m s i t t i ng ther e l i ke, w h a t a re y o u ta lk in g a b o u t. A n d h e ta k e s – th e c h ie f h a d , y o u k n o w , a coupl e of thi ngs i n hi s offi ce that , y ou know , var i ous peopl e gave hi m over th e c o u rse o f

th e y e a rs o r w h a tev e r. A n d h e a rra n g e d a c o u p le o f th in g s in th is c o f f in . H e h a d a c o f

f in . H e h a d a b ra id , a d o ll an d h e a rra n g e d th e m in a c o f f in . I’m sa y in g lik e , m a n , w h a t ar e y o u d o in g . A n d h e sa id , this is ra c ism in h e re . B e c a u se a t th e tim e , y o u k n o w , the re w a s a lo t o f little things going aroun d, peo ple s ay i ng raci al stuff and I guess he w as j ust try i ng t o fl yw i th the w hol e s cena r i o. H e t ook a l ett eroutof hi s pocket , no Ni g g e r s a l l o we d . T h e n wh e n h e d i d th a t , h e p u ti tu p a g a i n s tth e wa l l . He sa id , I am g o in g to tak e a p ictu re o f th is a n d I a m g o in g to sh o w th e w h o le sce n ario li k e this an d I am g o ing to tak e itto m ylaw y er. A 7 3 1 -32 (Jac k so n D ep . ). 4 N ei therL eak norD enni s s ubm i t t ed af fi davi t s deny i ng thes e hi ghl ys peci fi c, and
verys er i ous , al l egat i ons . R emar kabl y , theyneverthel es s cont end thatw hetherornott hey fabr i cat ed the r aci s tdi s pl ayi s an i s s ue of c r edi bi l i ty , w hi ch s houl d have be en l eftt o t he j ury . W e ar e notper s uaded. I n t he abs ence of a s w orn deni al , ther e i s no genui ne i s s ue of fac tand utt er l yno bas i s t o even s ugges tthatanyr eas onabl e j uryw oul d r ej ectthe7

te s tim o n yo f

M o o re a n d J a c k s o n a n d re tu rn a v e rd ic t f o r L e a k a n d D e n n is o n th is c la im . A ccor di ngl y , s um m aryj udgm entw as appr opr i at el ygr ant ed. C. Re t a l i a t i o n Cl a i ms T o est abli sh a pri m a facie cas e of ret al i at i on un der ei ther T i t l e V II or L A D , N . J. St at . A nn. § 10: 5- 12( d) ( 2005) , a pl ai nt i ff musts how that : ( 1) he ors he enga ged i n a pr ot ect ed empl oy ee a ct i vi ty ; ( 2) he ors he s uffe r ed an a dver s e empl oym entact i ons ; and ( 3) a ca us al l i nk exi s t s betw een the pr ot ect ed ac t i vi tyand the adve r s e ac t i on. W es t on v. Penns y l vani a, 251 F. 3d 420, 430 ( 3d C i r . 2001) ; R om ano v. B r ow n & W i l l i amson T obacc o C orp. , 665 A . 2d 1139, 1142 ( N . J . Super . C t . A pp. D i v. 1995) . C onductbyan e m p lo y e r q u a lifie s a s a n a d v e rse e m p lo ym e n t ac tio n o n lyif it i s “ se rio u s a n d tan g ib le enough t o al t eran empl oy ee’ s compensa t i on, t erm s , condi t i ons , orpr i vi l eges or empl oym ent . ” R obi ns on v. C i tyof Pi t t s bur gh, 120 F. 3d 1286, 1300 ( 3d C i r . 1997) . O r al
r epr i m ands and der ogat orycomm ent s do notqual i fyas adver s e empl oym entact i ons for purpos es of es t abl i s hi ng a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e of r et al i at i on. I d. at1301. Si m i l ar l y , “a pur el yl at er al tr ans fer , thati s , a tr ans ferthatdoes noti nvol ve a de m ot i on i n form or s u b s t a n c e , c a n n o tr i s e t o th e l e v e l o f a ma t e r i a l l ya d v e r s e e mp l o yme n ta c t i o n . ” W i l l i a ms v. B r i s t ol
- M y er s Squi bb C o. , 85 F. 3d 270, 274 ( 7th C i r . 1996) , ci t ed w i th appr oval i n R obi ns on, 120 F. 3d at1301. W e agr ee w i th the D i s tr i ctC our tthatnei therL eak norD enni s al l eged a cogni zabl e adve r s e empl oym entact i on. W hi l e i ti s undi s put ed thattheyw er e tr ans ferr edB eca us e thes e tr ans fer s w er e r ecomm ended bythe EE D i nves t i gat orw ho handl ed 5 pl ai nt i ffs ’ s er i es of cha r ges , A 664 ( obs ervi ng thatD enni s and Leak “de s erve rea ssign m en t bas ed u p o n their fe ars a n d p erc ep ti o n s” a n d that “tran sfe r i s w arran ted” ), w e a lso f ind the re q u isi te ca u sal co n n ec ti o n to b e lac k ing . T h at i s, ev en if th e tran sfe rs w er e adve r s e empl oym entact i ons , as pl ai nt i ffs cl ai m , a r eas onabl e j uryw oul d be compel l ed t o concl ude thattheyw er e the l egi t i m at e r es ul tof the EE D i nves t i gat i ve p ro c e ss , as o p p o se d to ill e g iti m a te r e talia tio n f o r p lain tiff

s’ f ili n g o f th is la w su it. 8 fr om E J SP t o M ount ai nvi ew Y outh C orr ect i onal Faci l i tyand N or thern St at e Pr i s on, r es pect i vel y , on M ay24, 1999, ther e i s no evi dence thatthes e tr ans fer s r es ul t ed i n a re d u c tio n in p a yo r sta tu s f o r e ith e r m a n . C f. W ill iam s, 8 5 F .3 d a t 2 7 4 (e x p lain in g th a t a late ra l tran sf

e r in v o lv in g “ n o re d u c tio n in p a ya n d n o m o re th a n a m in o r c h a n g e in
w or ki ng condi t i ons ” does notqual i fyas adver s e empl oym entact i on) . I n fac t , the tr ans fer
or deri t s el f m ade c l earthatL eak a nd D enni s w er e t o “r emai n on thei rs ame shi ftw i th the
s ame day s off” and l eftopen the pos s i bi l i tythattheycoul d r eturn t o E J SP once the i nves t i gat i on i nt o thei rchar ges w as compl et ed. A 665. A ccor di ngl y , w e fi nd as a mat t er of law that the tr ansfers w ere notadv ers e em ploym ent act i on s. E ach o f t he o ther adv ers e 5
ac ti o n s p rof

fe red b yL ea k an d D en n is fail s fo r si m il ar rea so n s. W e w il l, there fo re, aff irm the g rantof sum m aryj ud gm ent on t he ret al i at i on cl ai m s. D. Re ma i n i n g Cl a i ms Fors ubs t ant i al l ythe r eas ons s etfor th i n the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s opi ni on, w e conc l ude
w i thoutfur therdi s cus s i on thats um m aryj udgm entw as appr opr i at el ygr ant ed on plai nti ffs’ r em ai ning cl ai m s.9 III . T he D i stri ctC ou rt ’s order of M ay24 , 20 04 w i l l be af fi rm ed. In addit i on , becau se p lain tiff s h a v e f a iled to a d d re ss th e d e n ial o f th e ir m o tio n f

o r re c o n sid e ra tio n in th e ir
s u b m is s io n s to u s , th e D is tr ic t C o u rt ’s o rd e r o f J u ly 2 6 , 2 0 0 4 w ill a ls o b e a f f ir m e d .