Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

WALKER v. AMR SERVS. CORP.

July 31, 1997

SYLVIA WALKER, Plaintiff, against AMR SERVICES CORP., Defendant.


The opinion of the court was delivered by: DEARIE

 DEARIE, District Judge.

 Defendant AMR Services Corporation ("AMRS") has moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of plaintiff's claims of sexual harassment and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. ┬ž 2000(e), as amended ("Title VII"). *fn1" Alternatively, defendant moves to strike plaintiff's prayer for compensatory and punitive damages. For the reasons articulated below, defendant's motion is denied.

 Background

 Plaintiff Sylvia Walker began working full-time at AMRS on May 5, 1993 as a Cargo Freight Agent. Walker Dep. 44, 54. She worked the night shift (6:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.) while simultaneously working full-time (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) at Burghart Shipping. Id. at 53, 374-75. Kenneth St. Louis was one of three night shift supervisors at AMRS. Id. at 53-54

 Plaintiff alleges that St. Louis sexually harassed her throughout July and August, 1993 by engaging in the following conduct:

 
while driving plaintiff home from work, St. Louis complained, on approximately five occasions, that he was not happy at home and wanted to start over with a new woman, Walker Dep. 68-69;
 
while driving plaintiff home from work, St. Louis told plaintiff they would make a good couple; plaintiff stated that she wasn't interested, id. at 74-75;
 
at work, St. Louis told plaintiff that she "looked good from behind" and that she made it difficult to work when she wore jeans on Sundays, *fn2" id. at 64, 77-78;
 
at work, St. Louis told plaintiff, "You're a very hard-working person. The both of us could make a good couple," id. at 63;
 
at work, St. Louis arrived with his face bandaged and swollen after a car accident and told plaintiff that he would not appear that way if his wife cared about him, id. at 69-70;
 
while driving plaintiff home from work, St. Louis told plaintiff he left his wife for one and one half years but returned because of his daughter, id. at 72;
 
at work, St. Louis complained about his ill-fitting pants and told plaintiff that "If I had a woman home, she would know that my pants needed to be hemmed properly," id. at 69-70;
 
after St. Louis heard plaintiff was relocating, St. Louis repeatedly offered to help her move; plaintiff declined St. Louis' offers, id. at 66, 96-99;
 
at a holiday cook-out at plaintiff's home, St. Louis told plaintiff that her daughter looked at him because she knew he would be her future stepfather, id. at 64;
 
while driving plaintiff home from work one day, St. Louis slowed the car down, lunged towards Walker, and exclaimed, "I want to be all over you." plaintiff rebuffed St. Louis' assault by springing up and asking "What are you doing?" Id. at 65, 103. St. Louis drove off, stating to plaintiff "Good things can happen to you at AMR" if she gave him a chance. Id. at 65-66.

 After this last incident, plaintiff ceased riding home with St. Louis, except for one occasion in September when she was unable to obtain car service. Id. at 100, 117-20. In addition, a co-worker told plaintiff that St. Louis "had the hots for" her. Id. at 64.

 Plaintiff also charges that she was retaliated against for refusing to indulge St. Louis' sexual advances. St. Louis allegedly refused plaintiff's request for a day off when her son was taken to the emergency room, even though there was ample staff coverage in the department, id. at 137-43; required plaintiff (and only plaintiff) to stay at work late on Monday nights and perform work that could have been done earlier in the shift, id. at 151-52; eavesdropped on plaintiff's private telephone conversations, id. at 169-75; requested that plaintiff go to the import department when she was not scheduled to do so, id. at 191-93; and repeatedly stared at plaintiff during working hours. Id. at 206-10.

 Sensing that she was being "set up," plaintiff requested a meeting on October 19, 1993 with Terminal Manager D'Apice, Supervisor St. Louis, and Yadera Matos, a cargo freight agent with whom plaintiff had previously discussed St. Louis' sexual advances. Walker Dep. 222. At the meeting, plaintiff recounted St. Louis' alleged sexual harassment, and Matos told D'Apice that plaintiff had informed her of St. Louis' alleged actions at an earlier date. D'Apice Dep. 32; Matos Dep. 22-24. D'Apice believed that there was not enough evidence to determine whether these claims were well-founded. D'Apice Dep. 52. D'Apice did not interview St. Louis, plaintiff or any co-worker about the incidents. D'Apice Dep. 83. Although he removed St. Louis from a direct supervisory ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.