Times v. Success Academy Charter Schools, Inc.

Background

Jerald Times worked for Success Academy Charter Schools, Inc. as Director of Chess beginning in January 2019. His annual salary was $150,000. Success Academy later reassigned some of his responsibilities, gave him performance reviews identifying problems such as missed deadlines and difficulty managing time, money, and personnel, placed him on a development plan, and reclassified him as Chess Manager in October 2020, reducing his salary to $125,000. Times’s employment ended on November 17, 2020.

Times, who appeared without a lawyer when opposing the motion, asserted race-discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also asserted retaliation claims under Title VII and the New York State Human Rights Law, and hostile-work-environment claims under Title VII and the New York State Human Rights Law. The defendants moved for summary judgment, which is a ruling entered when the evidence shows that no reasonable jury could find for the opposing party on a claim.

Race-discrimination claims

Judge Cote granted summary judgment to the defendants on all of Times’s race-discrimination claims. The court considered Times’s performance reviews, reassignment of responsibilities, demotion, and termination. It held that Times had not presented sufficient evidence that these actions were motivated by race. The court recognized his accomplishments but found that the defendants had documented concerns about attendance, deadlines, and management, and that Times’s disagreement with those evaluations did not itself establish discrimination.

The court also rejected Times’s proposed comparators, including Matthew Morales, Boris Bozic, and Pamela Ostroff-Intrater, because Times had not shown that their circumstances sufficiently resembled his. It further found that Times’s evidence about treatment of other Black employees, teachers, students, guest speakers, and sports programs was not sufficiently connected to the decisions affecting him. The court reached the same result under the New York State and New York City laws, even though those laws can apply more broadly than federal law. It also granted summary judgment on Times’s claims under § 1983, which provides a cause of action for certain constitutional violations by persons acting under state law.

Retaliation claims

The court granted summary judgment on most of Times’s retaliation claims. It found that his support for coworkers in October 2019 was too remote from the later employment actions, that his listing as a witness in a coworker’s administrative inquiry was not protected activity because Success Academy had not received notice of it, and that his June 30, 2020 email and October 16, 2020 email did not adequately communicate opposition to unlawful discrimination.

The court reached a different conclusion about Times’s October 22, 2020 email to Human Resources, in which he wrote that his demotion should be part of a larger discussion about “unconscious bias” at Success Academy. The court held that a jury could understand that email as opposing discriminatory conduct. Because Times was terminated within weeks, the timing could support a causal connection, and the defendants’ stated reason—that he refused to accept the demotion—did not establish as a matter of law that the email played no role. The retaliation claims based on that email and the termination therefore survived. Under the New York State Human Rights Law, however, the surviving claim was dismissed against Morales because Times had not shown that Morales personally participated in the termination decision.

Hostile-work-environment claims

The court granted summary judgment on Times’s hostile-work-environment claims under Title VII and the New York State Human Rights Law. It found that the evidence—including the treatment of other employees, Times’s demotion and termination, teacher-promotion decisions, and one reported incident of shouting—was insufficient for a jury to find that Times’s workplace was severely or pervasively abusive because of race.

Additional discovery and disposition

Times asked to reopen discovery and obtain additional documents. Judge Cote denied that request. Times had previously participated in a discovery period while represented by counsel, made 64 document requests, and did not raise discovery disputes with the court. The court found that his later 199 requests were broad and would effectively restart discovery.

The final disposition was that the defendants’ motion for summary judgment was granted in part. Morales received summary judgment on all claims against him. The defendants received summary judgment on all discrimination claims, all hostile-work-environment claims, and all retaliation claims except the retaliation claims premised on Times’s October 22, 2020 email and the termination of his employment.