Sheryl Storey Hammonds v. Sheriff Theodore Jackson ( 2016 )

Case: 15-12716 Date Filed: 01/04/2016 Page: 1 of 4
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 15-12716
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-00711-MHS
SHERYL STOREY HAMMONDS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
FULTON COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants,
SHERIFF THEODORE JACKSON,
in his official capacity as the Fulton County Sheriff,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(January 4, 2016)
Case: 15-12716 Date Filed: 01/04/2016 Page: 2 of 4
Before WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Sheryl Storey Hammonds, a former deputy of the Fulton County Sheriff’s
Office, appeals the summary judgment in favor of Sheriff Theodore Jackson and
against her amended complaint about retaliation for engaging in a protected
activity, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.
§ 2000e-3(a). The district court ruled that Hammonds failed to establish that
employees of the Sheriff twice denied her requests to obtain additional
employment, denied her applications for leave under the Family and Medical
Leave Act, and transferred her to the jail to retaliate for a statement she gave in an
investigation about potential discrimination by Officer Charlene Heard.
Alternatively, the district court ruled that Hammonds failed to prove that the
legitimate reasons provided for the employment decisions were pretexts for
retaliation. We affirm.
We review a summary judgment de novo and view the evidence in the light
most favorable to the nonmovant. Brown v. Alabama Dep’t of Transp., 597 F.3d
1160, 1173 (11th Cir. 2010). Summary judgment is appropriate “if the movant
shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Mere conclusions
and factual allegations unsupported by evidence are insufficient to survive a
2
Case: 15-12716 Date Filed: 01/04/2016 Page: 3 of 4
motion for summary judgment. Ellis v. England, 432 F.3d 1321, 1326–27 (11th
Cir. 2005).
Hammonds failed to establish a causal connection between any adverse
employment action and her protected activity. See Brown, 597 F.3d at 1182.
Although Heard denied Hammonds’s first request for additional employment in
January 2011 and arguably contributed to the denial of Hammonds’s second
request in February 2011, those actions were too remote to Hammonds’s protected
activity in the summer of 2009 to establish causation based on temporal proximity.
See Thomas v. Cooper Lighting, Inc., 506 F.3d 1361, 1364 (11th Cir. 2007). With
respect to the denial of Hammonds’s requests for leave, the undisputed evidence
established that Colonel Jimmy Butts was the ultimate decisionmaker and he was
unaware of Hammonds’s statement about Heard, which eliminated any potential
motive for retaliation. See Brungart v. BellSouth Telecomms., Inc., 231 F.3d 791,
799 (11th Cir. 2000). And Sheriff Jackson testified, without dispute, that he did not
know of Hammonds’s protected activity and that he transferred her to the jail to
satisfy a court decree that required him to staff the facility with more supervisors.
See id. Hammonds alleged that Heard attended staffing meetings and could have
recommended the transfer, but Hammonds failed to provide any evidence, beyond
her speculation, that Jackson then served as a “mere conduit, or ‘cat’s paw’ to give
3
Case: 15-12716 Date Filed: 01/04/2016 Page: 4 of 4
effect to [Heard’s retaliatory] animus.” See Stimpson v. City of Tuscaloosa, 186
F.3d 1328, 1332 (11th Cir. 1999).
We AFFIRM the summary judgment in favor of Sheriff Jackson.
4