Price v. Southwest Airlines, Co.

Background

Raymond Price sued Southwest Airlines, Co., asserting that Southwest wrongfully terminated his employment. Price worked for Southwest from October 2014 until March 1, 2019. Southwest said the termination was based on violations of its Policy Concerning Harassment, Sexual Harassment, Discrimination & Retaliation and its On and Off Duty Conduct Policy.

The underlying conduct involved a rap song Price had written before he began working for Southwest. The song used the n-word twice. In June 2018, while off duty, Price filmed a music video based on the song. The video was later circulated among employees, although the opinion states that Price was not responsible for circulating it. During Southwest’s investigation, Price did not disclose that he had recorded the video in June 2018; he said only that he had written the song before working for Southwest.

Price asserted claims for race discrimination in employment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, violations of sections 96(k) and 1101, and an unlawful-business-practices claim under California Business and Professions Code section 17200.

Summary-judgment standard and claims that remained

A summary-judgment motion asks the court to decide a claim without a trial when there is no genuine dispute about a fact important to the result. The court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the opposing party.

The court found genuine disputes concerning Price’s race-discrimination and wrongful-termination claims. In particular, the evidence raised questions about whether Southwest actually believed Price violated its policies, whether Price used the n-word in a derogatory way, and how the Off Duty Policy applied to conduct recorded outside work. The court also found a possible dispute about discriminatory motive because Southwest terminated Price rather than imposing another form of discipline, the investigator did not recommend termination, and the Harassment Policy did not require termination. The court concluded that these questions should be decided by a jury.

The court also allowed Price’s section 17200 claim to continue because that claim was based on his discrimination and unlawful-termination claims.

Claims resolved against Price

The court granted summary judgment for Southwest on Price’s intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim. The court found that Price offered no evidence of the severe emotional distress required for that claim. The evidence showed embarrassment, shame, humiliation, lack of sleep, and depression after the termination, but Price had not sought treatment or medication, and the court found this evidence insufficient under the applicable standard.

The court also granted summary judgment for Southwest on the section 96(k) and section 1101 claims because Price stated in his opposition that he would not pursue them.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part Southwest’s motion for summary judgment. It granted the motion as to the emotional-distress, section 96(k), and section 1101 claims, and denied the motion as to Price’s remaining claims.