Becky Mussat-Whitlow v. Winston-Salem State University

Summary

This is a memorandum opinion and order from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina addressing Winston-Salem State University’s motion to dismiss claims brought by Becky Mussat-Whitlow. The opinion grants dismissal of the ADA failure-to-accommodate and disability-based discharge claims and denies dismissal of the ADEA age-discrimination claim. The provided text ends during the Court’s discussion of the Title VII sex-discrimination claim, so its complete disposition is not shown.

Holdings

1. The amended complaint failed to plausibly state a failure-to-accommodate claim because it did not allege that Plaintiff requested an accommodation that Defendant refused. Allegations that Defendant failed to engage in an interactive process, without a specific denied accommodation, were conclusory.
2. The amended complaint failed to plausibly allege that disability was the but-for cause of Plaintiff's termination or otherwise establish circumstances supporting a reasonable inference of disability discrimination.
3. Winston-Salem State University, as an agency or arm of the State of North Carolina, is immune from punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(1).
4. The amended complaint plausibly stated an ADEA age-discrimination claim because allegations concerning retirement and succession plans, age-related health comments, and a decisionmaker's comment that eye surgery was needed only by someone elderly supported a reasonable inference that Plaintiff was discharged because of her age.
5. The amended complaint plausibly stated a Title VII sex-discrimination claim because Plaintiff alleged satisfactory performance, termination, sexually charged comments directed at her by an interim supervisor, and that the supervisor participated in the termination decision.
6. The amended complaint plausibly stated a Title VII retaliation claim because Plaintiff alleged that she rejected her supervisor's unwanted sexual advances, the supervisor knew of that opposition, treated her adversely afterward, and participated in the termination decision.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the amended complaint plausibly stated an ADA failure-to-accommodate claim.
2. Whether the amended complaint plausibly stated an ADA wrongful-discharge claim.
3. Whether Winston-Salem State University was immune from punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(1).
4. Whether the amended complaint plausibly stated an ADEA age-discrimination claim.
5. Whether the amended complaint plausibly stated a Title VII sex-discrimination claim.
6. Whether the amended complaint plausibly stated a Title VII retaliation claim based on Plaintiff's alleged rejection of unwanted sexual advances.

Disposition

other