Opinion ID: 219821
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Dean Meezan’s Internal Complaint

Text: Alexander contends that Dean Meezan filed an internal complaint against him in retaliation for filing charges with the EEOC. The district court held that Alexander failed to establish a prima - 14 - No. 10-3358 Alexander v. Ohio State University College of Social Work, et al. facie case of retaliation with respect to Dean Meezan’s complaint, because the complaint did not constitute an adverse employment action. The scope of Title VII’s retaliation provision is broader than that of the discrimination provision and protects employees from any actions that would have “dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination.” Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53, 68 (2006) (quotation marks and citations omitted). A plaintiff must show that the action was “materially adverse” from the standpoint of a “reasonable employee.” Id. at 68–69. The Supreme Court has limited “adverse employment actions” to something more than “petty slights, minor annoyances, and simple lack of good manners.” Id. at 68. We assume without deciding that the lodging of a complaint to OSU’s Human Resources Office can constitute a “materially adverse” employment action. We nonetheless affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to defendants on this claim because Alexander has presented no evidence that the dean’s proffered motive for filing the complaint was a pretext for retaliation. Based on facts that Alexander admitted in his deposition, the dean had a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for filing a complaint alleging that Alexander was harassing him based on his sexual orientation and HIV-positive status. Alexander told a classroom of students that the dean was racist, gay, and a “leprechaun.” Alexander also told a provost and a fellow professor that the dean had AIDS and that people feared he “might accidentally head butt them or scratch their faces.” He sent emails to university administrators and faculty calling the dean a racist and a liar who favored gay and white faculty members. These undisputed facts were sufficient to motivate the dean’s - 15 - No. 10-3358 Alexander v. Ohio State University College of Social Work, et al. actions—the dean had the right to seek assistance from OSU in preserving his reputation and keeping his health condition private.