Court Denied the Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in Harassment Suit

In recent news, The Northern District of California court denied the defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment in Katheryn Moses v. Aerotek, Inc.

The Case: Katheryn Moses v. Aerotek, Inc.

The Court: United States District Court Northern District of California San Jose Division

The Case No.: 17-cv-06251-BLF

The Plaintiff: Katheryn Moses v. Aerotek, Inc.

The plaintiff in the case is Katheryn Moses. Aerotek, the defendant, hired Moses in September 2014 as a recruiter in their San Jose office, and was promoted to Account Manager about one year later. In December 2016, Moses reached a benchmark at the company that earned her a company trip to Cancun, Mexico in January or February of 2017. Prior to taking the trip, Moses was terminated from her employment on Jan. 25, 2017. After her termination, Moses filed suit alleging retaliation, failure to prevent retaliation, failure to prevent harassment (violating FEHA), and failure to provide records (violating California’s Labor Code). Moses claims she was terminated in retaliation for reporting inappropriate conduct of a senior manager, Onyeka Ossai, who she had a sexual relationship with during her time employed at the company. He was also part of the interview panel when she received her promotion to Account Manager. Ossai denies that the two were in a relationship, claiming they had only one encounter in 2015.

The Defendant: Katheryn Moses v. Aerotek, Inc.

The defendant in the case, Aerotek, a staffing company, claims that Moses was fired for performance issues, including interviewing with other companies during work hours. In response to their former employee’s lawsuit, the defendant, Aerotek, Inc. filed a motion seeking partial summary judgment in regard to Moses’ FEHA claims as well as her claim for punitive damages.

More About the Case: Katheryn Moses v. Aerotek, Inc.

According to court documents, the difficulties between Moses and Ossai escalated to a confrontation at a company event at which Moses claims Ossai pushed her. After this incident, Moses called an Aerotek supervisor, Lane, to report that there had been an inappropriate relationship and that Ossai had put his hands on her. Lane advised Moses to skip work the next day and since she was already scheduled for time off for the holidays, she didn’t need to return to work until January 2017. Lane reached out to Ossai, who denied pushing Moses. When all three returned to work in January 2017, Lane urged Moses to sit down and work it out with Ossai, but she refused. Moses then suggested that Lane contact Aerotek’s Human Resources Manager, Shelia Simmons, which he did.

An Official Investigation Begins: Katheryn Moses v. Aerotek, Inc.

On January 19, 2017, Simmons opened a formal investigation and notified the company’s Regional VP, Eric Bowen. Bowen reprimanded Lane for his mishandling of the complaint and warned him that a future failure to report workplace issues could mean he’d lose his job. Simmons’ notes on the investigation indicate that she conducted interviews with Moses, and 8 others, but that much of the investigation focused on Moses’ behavior outside of and unrelated to the reported incident. Simmons’ notes do not reflect that she interviewed Ossai. However, she does testify that she spoke with him to ask if he put his hands on Moses, and that when she asked about his relationship with Moses, he was evasive. On January 20, 2017, Moses was presented with a disciplinary write up. Moses claims that when Lane presented her with the form, he was angry and made it clear she had put Ossai’s career at risk. Moses was terminated on January 25, 2017. Moses filed a DFEH complaint on June 2nd, 2017 followed by the present action in the Santa Clara County Superior Court on September 1st, 2017. The defendant removed the action to federal court October 27, 2017.

Defendant Seeks Partial Summary Judgment: Katheryn Moses v. Aerotek, Inc.

Most recently, the defendant filed a motion for partial summary judgment. Based on the lack of documentation regarding Moses’s alleged performance difficulties in 2016, her obvious job success in 2016 (she won a contest in Dec. 2016), Lane’s admission that he had never terminated other employees for interview-related activities, evidence that Lane was angry Moses’ actions could jeopardize Ossai’s career, and the small window of time between Moses’ reporting of the incident, and her termination, the court finds that the evidence seems to suggest retaliatory intent. Aerotek’s motion for partial summary judgment was denied based on these facts.

If you have questions about California labor law violations or need to file a hostile work environment or retaliation complaint, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.