United States District Court, D. Connecticut
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Janet
Bond Arterton, U.S.D.J.
Plaintiff
Robyn Senior (“Senior”) brings this action under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.
§§ 2000e, et seq, claiming that she was
retaliated against by her employer, the State of Connecticut
Workers' Compensation Commission, Third District, because
of Senior's opposition to religious discrimination in the
workplace. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.
I.
Background and Summary Judgment Record
The
operative complaint is Plaintiff's Third Amended
Complaint, filed December 29, 2017. ([Doc. # 25].) After the
Court's Order on the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss
([Doc. # 34])-in which the Court dismissed Plaintiff's
claim for hostile working environment-the remaining claim in
this lawsuit is Count Two, which alleges that Plaintiff has
been retaliated against for previous opposition to
discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq.
Plaintiff
filed a complaint with the Connecticut Commission on Human
Rights and Opportunities (“CHRO”) on May 28,
2015. (Parties' L.R. Stmts. [Doc. ## 40-2, 41-1] ¶
3.) She began working for the Workers' Compensation
Commission in 1987 and worked as a clerk in the Hamden office
for about ten years before she was promoted to the role of
processing technician. (Id. ¶¶ 4-5.)
Plaintiff moved to the Hartford Office and then was
transferred, at her request, to the New Haven office in 1998,
where she has remained as a processing technician since.
(Id. ¶ 6.) Plaintiff's supervisor, Dave
Lawson, has been her supervisor the entire time she has
worked in New Haven. (Id. ¶ 7.)
There
are about ten to twelve people who work in the New Haven
Office. Plaintiff is one of two processing technicians; the
other is Helen Payne. (Id. ¶ 8.) Mr. Lawson
supervises all of the employees in the New Haven office as
the District Administrator. (Id.) There are three
office assistants in the office: Debra Trimachi, Jennifer
Nieves (formerly Watert), and Silveri Robinson. (Id.
¶ 9.) There is also a paralegal, Deborah Russo, and a
court reporter, Robert Miller. (Id. ¶ 10.)
Plaintiff's job duties are clerical in nature and she
also does archiving for the office. (Id. ¶ 11.)
In 2005
and 2008, Plaintiff alleges that she witnessed her co-worker,
Silveri Robinson, state that another co-worker, Jennifer
Nieves, was the devil and was evil, and that Ms. Robinson
would draw pictures and write letters, and that Plaintiff
also witnessed Robinson tear pictures down from Nieves's
wall. (Id. ¶ 12.) During the same time period,
Plaintiff also allegedly witnessed Robinson running away from
Nieves in the office. (Id. ¶ 13.) On another
occasion, Plaintiff observed Robinson running away from
Plaintiff's car in the parking garage “as though
[Plaintiff] was going to hit her.” (Ex. 1 (Senior Dep.)
to Def.'s Mot. Summ. J. [Doc. # 40-3] at 30-31.)
Plaintiff
also alleges that Ms. Robinson would hand out religious
pamphlets in the office to Commissioners during the same time
frame (2005) and would talk about Jesus and religion, which
continues to the current day. (Parties' L.R. Stmts.
¶ 15.) Plaintiff alleges that Ms. Robinson reads her
Bible all the time, but that she does not really have contact
with Ms. Robinson because she stays away from her.
(Id. ¶ 16.) More recently, there was another
incident between Ms. Robinson and an unnamed coworker, but
Plaintiff does not know “what happened”; she
“just heard a lot of commotion and a lot of
pushing.” (Senior Dep. at 34.) Plaintiff testified that
“Sandra Cunningham, which is human resources, she came
down and said that she was going [to] move Sil[]veri's
seat.” (Id.) Plaintiff was not involved.
(Id.) At her deposition, Plaintiff testified that
she could not think of any other incidents of religious
harassment involving Ms. Robinson. (Id. at 31, 34.)
Plaintiff
alleges that she complained about Ms. Robinson to her
supervisor, Dave Lawson, to Sandra Cunningham in Human
Resources and to her union. (Parties' L.R. Stmts. ¶
19.) Plaintiff alleges that Ms. Nieves asked her to complain
to Mr. Lawson about the incident in 2005 involving the
pictures and Ms. Robinson running. (Id. ¶ 21.)
She
complained to Lawson “all the time[, ]” first
doing so in the 2005-2008 period, and did so orally. (Senior
Dep. at 35-36.) During this period, she specifically told him
that “Sil[]veri was harassing Jennifer because of her
religion[.]” (Id. at 37.) Plaintiff did not
complain to Lawson about religious harassment by Silveri
Robinson outside of the 2005-2008 time frame. (Id.
at 38.) In addition to her oral complaints to Lawson,
Plaintiff also wrote a letter about Robinson's behavior
at some point in the 2005-2008 period. (Id. at
38-39.)
Plaintiff
also complained to Sandra Cunningham in HR in 2008 or 2009,
after Cunningham came down to meet with everyone in the
office at Jennifer Nieves' request. (Id. at 40.)
However, Plaintiff testified that Cunningham did not give
Plaintiff a chance to elaborate on Robinson's behavior in
any detail. (Id. at 41.) Plaintiff subsequently
complained to Cunningham in phone calls about Robinson's
behavior after Robinson “wrote a letter stating that .
. . she almost fell down the stairs and lost her life because
. . . she heard [Plaintiff] coming.” (Id. at
41-42.) Plaintiff told Cunningham that this had never
happened and that if it did, Plaintiff “knew nothing
about it.” (Id. at 42.)
Plaintiff
and her clerical coworkers (presumably including Nieves, but
she did not specify) filed a union grievance claiming
religious harassment by Robinson, which Cunningham “had
. . . dismissed because she told the union she was going to
move [Robinson] to another office[.]” (Id.)
However, Cunningham never moved Robinson. (Id.)
Plaintiff
testified that “we called CHRO” but otherwise she
never participated in any EEOC or CHRO proceedings in support
of Trimachi or Nieves. (Senior Dep. at 37.)
Plaintiff
also testified that she complained after 2008 about Robinson
on a regular basis but could not identify any specific
occasions on which she did so because she ...