Chidume v. GreenBurgh-North Castle Union Free School District

Background

Patrick Chidume, a teacher in the District, alleged race and national-origin discrimination, retaliation, constructive discharge, defamation, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, tortious interference with contract, and prima facie tort. He sued the District, Superintendent Carolyn McGuffog, Director of Pupil Personnel Robin Levine, and former Interim Principal of Clark School and Board President Robert Hendrickson.

The defendants filed a second motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), which addresses personal jurisdiction, and Rule 12(b)(6), which addresses whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. The court denied the personal-jurisdiction branch because all defendants had been served within the court’s deadline.

Title VII claims

Title VII is the federal law prohibiting employment discrimination based on, among other things, race and national origin and prohibiting retaliation for opposing unlawful discrimination. The court dismissed Chidume’s Title VII race and national-origin discrimination claims because his administrative charge mainly described retaliation for filing a union grievance and did not provide facts supporting race or national-origin discrimination. Merely checking boxes for those categories was not enough.

The court also dismissed the Title VII retaliation theory based on Chidume’s June 1, 2017 union grievance and his transfer. The court found that the grievance, as described in the complaint and administrative charge, concerned an alleged violation of the collective bargaining agreement rather than discrimination. The court further found that the transfer allegations did not plausibly show an adverse employment action because the complaint did not explain that the new school was less prestigious or materially less suited to Chidume’s skills.

The court treated the alleged retaliation following Chidume’s administrative charge and lawsuit differently. It found that the alleged Justice Center investigation in August 2017 did not plausibly result from the administrative charge because Chidume’s own allegations indicated that his classroom comments led to the investigation. But the court found plausible the allegations that the District failed to pay Chidume during the February 2018 school break, required him to undergo an examination under New York Education Law § 913, and stopped paying him in May 2018. The motion to dismiss was therefore granted in part and denied as to the alleged retaliation occurring in February and May 2018.

42 U.S.C. § 1981 claim

The court dismissed the second claim, brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, in its entirety. Relying on Second Circuit precedent, the court held that § 1981 does not apply to state actors and that the claim could not proceed against the District or the individual defendants.

First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

The third claim alleged that the defendants retaliated against Chidume for advocating for union members, in violation of the First Amendment. The court granted the motion as to McGuffog, Levine, and Hendrickson because qualified immunity protected them from damages liability. Qualified immunity can protect individual government officials when the law did not clearly establish that their conduct violated the Constitution. The court found that, when the alleged conduct occurred, it was not clearly established whether Chidume’s union advocacy was protected First Amendment activity.

The court denied the motion as to the District. It found that union advocacy on behalf of other members could qualify as conduct by a private citizen on a matter of public concern and that Chidume plausibly alleged adverse actions and a causal connection involving the Justice Center investigation, the February 2018 pay issue, the requested examination, and the May 2018 cessation of pay.

New York State Human Rights Law claims

The court dismissed the fourth claim, under the New York State Human Rights Law, in its entirety. It dismissed the race and national-origin discrimination allegations for reasons corresponding to the dismissed Title VII claims. It dismissed the retaliation allegations concerning the transfer and Justice Center investigation for the same reasons as the related Title VII theories.

The court also dismissed the remaining state-law retaliation allegations because Chidume did not satisfy New York Education Law § 3813(1). That law required him to allege that he presented a written, verified claim to the District’s governing body within three months after the claims arose and that thirty days passed without adjustment or payment. The complaint did not make those allegations.

Other state-law claims

The court dismissed the fifth through seventh claims. The defamation claim failed to identify the alleged defamatory statements, who made them, when they were made, and to whom they were communicated. The statements about Chidume’s accent and election as union president were also treated as opinions rather than actionable factual statements.

The intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims were dismissed because the allegations did not meet New York’s requirements for extreme and outrageous conduct or otherwise provide a basis for recovery. The tortious-interference claim was dismissed because Chidume did not identify the contract or plead the required elements. The prima facie tort claim was dismissed because the alleged conduct was not otherwise lawful and the complaint did not plead specific special damages.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. It dismissed McGuffog, Levine, and Hendrickson as defendants, dismissed the second and fourth through seventh claims in their entirety, dismissed the race and national-origin portions of the first claim, and denied dismissal of the District on the third claim and of the Title VII retaliation allegations concerning February and May 2018. The clerk was directed to terminate the three individual defendants and the motion.