2007 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 6-26-2007 

# Lee v . C omh ar Inc 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 . 06-2811

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_2007

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 2007 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 " L e e v . C omh ar Inc " (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 883. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/883NOT 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 

### No. 06- 2811 MA RV IN E . LE E, Appe l l ant

v. COMHAR INC. O n A p p ea l Fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt F o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C i v. N o. 05- cv- 01781) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e Law r ence F. St engel Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

D ece m ber5, 2006 Be f o r e : BA RRY , CH AG AR ES AN D R OTH , CI RCU I T J UD GES

( Fi l ed: J une 26, 2007 ) OP I NI ON P E R C UR I AM A ppel l antM arvi n L ee, pr ocee di ng pr o s e, appea l s the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s entryof s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t in f a v o r o f A p p e lle e . F o r t h e re a s o n s th a t f o llo w , w e w ill a f

f ir m . L ee w as empl oy ed byA ppel l ee, C om har , I nc. , as a di r ectcar e w or kerfor2

ind ividu als w ith m en tal retarda ti o n . D u ri n g the tim e in q u esti o n , h e w o rke d at C o m h ar’s Pennw ays i t e. D avi d M i l bourne w as al s o an empl oy ee a tthi s s i t e. L ee a nd M i l bourne w or ked di ffe r ents hi ft s , and us ual l yover l apped f orno m or e than one hour . L ee a l l eges th a t, d u ri n g A u g u s t a n d S e p te m b e r o f 2 0 0 2 , h e w a s s e x u a lly h a ra s s e d b yM ilb o u rn e . Le e d e s c r i b e s th r e e i n c i d e n t s th a tf o r m th e b a s i s f

o rh i s c l a i m. F i r s t , Le e c l a i ms th a t o n a n u m b e r o f

o c c a s io n s , M ilb o u rn e to u c h e d h im o n th e a rm w h ile s p e a k in g to h im . In o n e ins tanc e, w h il e L ee an d M il b o u rne w ere in the ca r tran sp o rt ing tw o o f C o m h ar’s cl i ents t o a w orkshop , M i l bo urne t ou ched L ee’s hat and t hen brushed his han d ag ai nst L e e ’s s h o u ld e r. L e e sta tes th a t h e im m e d iate lysto p p e d th e c a r in re sp o n se to th is to u c h in g a n d to ld M ilb o u rn e n e v e r to to u c h h im a g a in , w h ich M ilb o u rn e d id n o t. N e x t, L e e m a in tain s th a t w h ile h e w a s d e m o n stra tin g a leg stre tch in g tec h n iq u e o n M ilb o u rn e in fr ontof s ever al ot herco- w or ker s , M i l bourne s ai d “oh, thatfee l s good, ” w i th w hatL ee b e l i e v e d t o b e a s e x u a l c o n n o t a t i o n , c a u s i n g th e o th e rp e o p l e i n th e r o o m l a u g h . F i n a l l y, L ee a l l eges thaton Sept ember27, 2002, as hi s s hi ftended a nd he w as pl anni ng t o l eave the r es i dence , M i l bourne w as s t andi ng i n fr ontof the doort al ki ng t o s om eone on the s t eps out s i de, i nt ent i onal l ybl ocki ng L ee’ s exi t . L ee s t at es thathe s ai d “l etm e getby h e re , b o y ,” a t w h ic h p o in t M ilb o u rn e m o v e d o u t o f th e w a ya n d le t L e e p a s s . A c c o rd in g to L e e , h e c o m p lain e d to h is a n d M ilb o u rn e ’s s u p e rv iso r, M ich e lle M u rri ll , ab o u t M il b o u rne ’s be h av ior af ter eac h o f th e thre e inc iden ts discu ssed ab o v e. In re sp o n se to th e las t in c id e n t, L e e a g a in m e t w ith M u rrill an d sa id to h e r: “ th is g a ystu f f is3

s t art i ng t o getps y chot i c. ” Lee furthers t at ed: “I ’ d hat e t o w r i t e an i nci dentr eportthat s om ebodyfel l dow n ar ound her e and gothur t . ” Lee admi t t ed t o m aki ng thi s comm entat l eas ttw o addi t i onal t i m es , m ai nl i ni ng thati tw as i nt ended a s a j oke. O n O ct ober4, 2002, L ee w as s us pended pe ndi ng the r es ul t s of an i nves t i gat i on i nt o hi s thr eat s of phy s i cal vi ol ence agai ns tM i l bourne. C oncurr ent l y , an i nves t i gat i on i nt o hi s cl ai m s of s exual h a ra s s m e n t w a s u n d e rt a k e n b yC o m h a r. W hi l e he w as s us pended, L ee f i l ed tw o i nci dentr eport s al l egi ng cl i entabus e. O ne r eportw as fi l ed on N ovember18, 2002 w i th Sar a B egan, the cl i ent ’ s cas e manager , bas ed on an i nci dentw hi ch al l egedl yoccurr ed on Sept ember28, 2002. T he otherw as fi l ed on N ovember22, 2002 w i th M i ke K ennedyof the Phi l adel phi a D epart m entof M ent al R et ar dat i on Ser vi ces , compl ai ni ng of both the af or ement i oned i nci dent , and another in c id e n t o f

a b u s e w h ic h a lle g e d ly to o k p la c e in J u ly o f 2 0 0 2 . O n N ovember26, 2002, L ee w as not i fi ed bya l ett erfr om B arryM cLaughl i n, C om har ’ s H um an R es our ces D i r ect or , thatC om har ’ s i nves t i gat i on of hi s al l egat i ons of se x u a l h a ra ss m e n t co n c lu d e d th a t n o su c h a c ts h a d o c c u rre d , an d th a t it s in v e stig a tio n in to h is b e h a v io r c o n c lu d e d th a t h e h a s “ e x p re ss e d n e g a tiv e o p in io n s, ste re o typ e d p e o p le w ith i ns ul t s and verbal l ythr eat ened phy s i cal vi ol ence . ” B as ed on thes e r es ul t s , C om har t e r m i n a t e d L e e ’ s e m p l o ym e n te f f e c t i v e i m m e d i a t e l y. L ee then fil ed the in stan t l aw su itin the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rtfo r th e E astern D istric t o f

P e n n sy lv a n ia. In h is a m e n d e d c o m p lain t, he a lleg e d : (i) th a t h e w a s th e v ictim4

o f b o th q u id p ro q u o a n d h o stile w o rk e n v iro n m e n t se x u a l h a ra ss m e n t an d re talia tio n in v io latio n o f

T itl e V II o f

th e C iv il R ig h ts A c t o f 1 9 6 4 ; (ii) tha t h e w a s te rm in a ted in v iolati o n o f th e P en n sy lvan ia W h ist leblo w er L aw ; ( ii i) that A p p ell ee co m m itted p erjury i n the con t ext of an u nem ploym ent com pen sat i on heari ng i n v i olat i on of 1 8 P a. C on s. S tat. A n n § § 4 9 0 2 , 4 9 0 3 & 4 9 0 4 ; (iv ) th a t A p p e llee in ten tio n a llyo r n e g lig e n tly m isre p re se n ted th e c o n ten ts o f a se ttl e m e n t ag re e m e n t in a n a ttem p t to d e f ra u d h im o f

h is rig h t to su e in v io latio n o f 4 3 P a . C o n s. S tat. A n n . § § 8 6 1 , 8 7 2 & 8 7 3 ; an d (v ) th a t in doi ng ( i i i ) and ( i v) , A ppel l ee i nt ent i onal l yi nfl i ct ed emot i onal di s tr es s on hi m . L ee s ought co m p en sato ry , ex em p laryan d p u n it ive d am ag es. O n A p ri l 17 , 2 0 0 6 , fo ll o w ing a f o u rm onth per i od of di s covery , C om harm oved fors um m aryj udgm ent . O n M ay18, 2006, t he D is tr ic t C o u rt g ra n te d C o m h a r’ s m o tio n a n d th e in s ta n t a p p e a l f o llo w e d . We h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e rth i s a p p e a l p u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C. § 1 2 9 1 . We r e v i e w a d istric t co u rt’s g ra n t o f

su m m a ryju d g m e n t d e n o v o . P e n n sy lv a n ia C o a l. A ss ’n v . B a b b itt , 63 F. 3d 231, 235 ( 3d C i r . 1995) . Sum m aryj udgm enti s pr operonl yi f i tappea r s “that ther e i s no genui ne i s s ue as t o anym at er i al fac tand thatthe 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. 56( c) ; C arr as ca v. Pom er oy , 313 F. 3d 828, 832- 33 ( 3d C i r . 2002) . W e w i l l dr aw al l i nfer ence s fr om the r ecor d i n favorof A ppel l ant as the non- m ovi ng party . I d. T he D i s tr i ctC our ti s s ued a thor ough opi ni on gr ant i ng A ppel l ee’ s m ot i on for s um m aryj udgm ent . Forthe r eas ons expr es s ed bythe D i s tr i ctC our t , w e agr ee that , t aki ng5

al l of A ppel l ant ’ s al l egat i ons as true, he has notm ade outa cl ai m forei therqui d pr o quo orhos t i l e w or k envi r onm ents exual har as s m entorr et al i at i on underT i t l e V I I , norhas he s at i s fi ed the r equi r ement s of a c l ai m fornegl i gentori nt ent i onal m i s r epr es ent at i on. See D ist . C t. M em . & O rde r at 5-8 , 9 -11 . W e f u rth er a g ree w ith the D istri ct C o u rtthat there i s no pr i vat e r i ghtof ac t i on under18 Pa. C ons . St at . A nn. §§ 4902, 4903 & 4904, or42 P a . C o n s . S ta t. A n n . § § 8 6 1 , 8 7 2 & 8 7 3 . S e e id . a t 1 0 . W i th r es pectt o A ppel l ant ’ s cl ai m underthe Penns y l vani a W hi s t l ebl ow erL aw , t he D istric t C o u rt c o n c lu d e d th a t A p p e llan t h a d f a iled to a lleg e th a t A p p e llee is a p u b lic body , and ther efor e r ej ect ed hi s cl ai m . See 42 Pa. C ons . St at . A nn. § 1423( a) ( barr i ng an em ploy er fr om t aking an adv ers e em ploym ent act i on againstan em ploy ee w ho “m akes a good fai th r eportori s aboutt o r eport , verbal l yori n w r i t i ng, t o the empl oy eror a p p ro p ri a te a u th o ri ty an in s ta n c e o f w ro n g d o in g o r w a s te ” ); 4 2 P a . C o n s . S ta t. A n n . § 1422 ( l i m i t i ng s t atut e t o empl oy ees of “publ i c bod[i es ] ”) . I ti s notent i r el ycl earfr om t he r ecor d thatA ppel l ee w oul d notbe cons i der ed a “ publ i c body ” forpurpos es of the P e n n s y lv a n ia W h is tle b lo w e r L a w . S e e D e n to n v . S ilv e r S tr e a m N u rs in g & R e h a b . C tr ., 7 3 9 A .2 d 5 7 1 (P a . S u p e r. 1 9 9 9 ) (h o ld in g th a t a r e c ip ien t o f M e d ica id f

u n d in g is a “ p u b lic body ” forpurpos es of the W hi s t l ebl ow erL aw ) . H ow ever , w e nee d notr eac h thi s i s s ue at th e p re se n t ti m e . A p p e llee a rg u e s th a t A p p e llan t o f f e re d n o e v id e n c e in d ica tin g th a t it w as aw ar e of hi s compl ai nt s al l egi ng cl i entabus e pr i ort o hi s t erm i nat i on, and A ppel l ant h a s n o t o f

f e re d a n yp ro o f

to re b u t th is a ss e rtio n . In f a c t, A p p e llan t m a in tain s th a t h is6

cl ai m r es t s onl yon the fa ctthathe made the compl ai nt s day s befor e he w as t erm i nat ed, and that“i ti s nothi s r es pons i bi l i tyt o det erm i ne w hen ori f the i nves t i gat or s cont act ed [A ppel l ee] . ” B eca us e A ppel l anthas fai l ed t o demonstr at e a c aus al connec t i on betw een the fi l i ng hi s compl ai nt s and hi s s ubs equentt erm i nat i on, and bec aus e A ppel l ee ha s offe r ed a l egi t i m at e r eas on forA ppel l ant ’ s t erm i nat i on, w e conc l ude thatthe D i s tr i ct C our tcorr ect l yent er ed s um m aryj udgm enti n favorof A ppel l ee on thi s cl ai m . See O ’ R our ke v. C om m onw eal th, 778A . 2d 1194, 1204 ( Pa. 2001) ( hol di ng thatan empl oy er m ayr ebuta pr i m a fa ci e ca s e of r et al i at i on bydemonstr at i ng thati tw oul d have t aken the s a m e a d v e rs e e m p lo ym e n t a c tio n a b s e n t th e e m p lo y e e ’s g o o d f a ith re p o rt o f

w ro n g d o in g ). Fi nal l y , A ppel l antcl ai m s thatthe D i s tr i ctC our tfai l ed t o addr es s hi s cl ai m s fort he i nt ent i onal i nfl i ct i on of emot i onal di s tr es s . U nderPenns y l vani a l aw , l i abi l i tyforthe i ntent i on al i nfli ct i on of em oti on al dis tres s l i es onlyw hen the all eged con du cti s “‘ so outr ageous i n char act er , and s o extr eme i n degr ee, as t o go bey ond al l pos s i bl e bounds of dece ncy , and t o be r egar ded as atr oci ous , and utt er l yi nt ol er abl e i n a ci vi l i zed s oci ety . ’ ” H oyv. A ngel one, 720 A . 2d 745, 754 ( Pa. 1998) ( quot i ng B ucze k v. Fi r s tN at ’ l B ank of M if f lin to w n , 5 3 1 A .2 d 1 1 2 2 , 1 1 2 5 (P a . S u p e r. 1 9 8 7 )). A s w e h a v e h e ld , “it is e x tre m e ly r ar e t o fi nd conducti n t he empl oym entcont extthatw i l l r i s e t o the l evel of outr ageous nes s nece s s aryt o pr ovi de a ba s i s forr ecove ryforthe t or tof i nt ent i onal inf li cti o n o f e m o ti o n al distr ess.” C o x v . K ey ston e C arb o n C o . , 8 6 1 F . 2 d 3 9 0 , 3 9 5 (3d C ir . 1988) . A ppel l anthas al l eged no c onductthatr i s es t o thi s l evel , and, as s uch, cannotp re v a il o n h is c la im f o r t h e in te n tio n a l in f

lic tio n o f e m o tio n a l d is tr e s s . A cc o rdin g ly , w e w il l aff irm the ju d g m en t of

the D istri ct C o u rt . A p p ell an t’ s m o tio n f o r s u m m a ry a c tio n is d e n ie d .

7