Susan Kinder v. Marion County Prosecutor's Office and Celita Scott

Kinder v. Marion County Prosecutor's Office, No. 1:24-cv-00856-TWP-MJD (S.D. Ind. Mar. 2, 2026) · United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana · March 2, 2026 · No. 1:24-cv-00856-TWP-MJD

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana granted summary judgment to the Marion County Prosecutor's Office and Celita Scott on Susan Kinder's Title VII retaliation claims concerning denial of a major felony secretary position and issuance of a verbal warning. The court held that neither action constituted a materially adverse employment action and that Kinder failed to establish a causal connection to her protected activity. The court also denied Kinder's embedded motion for spoliation sanctions, finding no evidence of bad-faith destruction or prejudice.

Holdings

  1. Denial of a purely lateral transfer with no additional pay or other demonstrated material change in employment terms is not a materially adverse employment action under Title VII retaliation law.
  2. A verbal warning that is not placed in the employee's personnel or permanent record, and an unfulfilled threat of future discipline, do not constitute materially adverse employment actions absent a tangible job consequence.
  3. Kinder failed to establish the required but-for causal connection between her protected activity and either the denial of the secretary position or the verbal warning.
  4. Spoliation sanctions and an adverse inference were unwarranted because Kinder failed to show that interview notes were intentionally destroyed in bad faith or that their loss caused prejudice.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the denial of the major felony secretary position constituted a materially adverse employment action for purposes of Kinder's Title VII retaliation claim.
  2. Whether the issuance of a verbal warning accompanied by an unfulfilled threat of further discipline constituted a materially adverse employment action.
  3. Whether Kinder presented sufficient evidence of but-for causation between her protected activity and either challenged employment action.
  4. Whether Kinder was entitled to spoliation sanctions or an adverse inference based on the destruction or nonproduction of interview notes.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (33)

  • Zerante v. DeLuca, 555 F.3d 582, 584 (7th Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986)(followed)
  • Kinder v. Marion County Prosecutor's Office, 2024 WL 2836481, at *7 (S.D. Ind. Apr. 2, 2024)(followed)
  • Kinder v. Marion County Prosecutor's Office, No. 24-1952, 2025 WL 914342, at *6 (7th Cir. 2025)(followed)
  • Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986)(followed)
  • Hemsworth v. Quotesmith.com, Inc., 476 F.3d 487, 489-90 (7th Cir. 2007)(followed)
  • Dorsey v. Morgan Stanley, 507 F.3d 624, 627 (7th Cir. 2007)(followed)
  • Sink v. Knox County Hosp., 900 F. Supp. 1065, 1072 (S.D. Ind. 1995)(followed)
  • Ritchie v. Glidden Co., 242 F.3d 713, 723 (7th Cir. 2001)(followed)
  • Chiaramonte v. Fashion Bed Grp., Inc., 129 F.3d 391, 395 (7th Cir. 1997)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 33.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…