Harris Powell v. Simon

Background

Tawana Harris Powell, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Archcare at Mary Manning Walsh Nursing Home. She invoked Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the New York City Human Rights Law. She alleged that Adanna Simon, a co-worker and nurse who sometimes acted as a supervisor, bullied and harassed her at work because of her national origin and age.

The amended complaint described several incidents involving Simon, including a call to Powell’s personal cellphone, yelling and cursing about answering call bells, an allegedly offensive comment about Powell’s body and relationships, a call to security, and a call to police. Powell alleged that these events caused anxiety and depression and made her not want to go to work. She attached a federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission notice giving her permission to sue and sought money damages.

Court’s analysis

Because Powell had been allowed to proceed without paying filing fees, the court reviewed the complaint under the federal screening statute. That statute requires dismissal of an action, or part of one, that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a legally sufficient claim, or seeks money from a legally immune defendant. The court also considered whether it had authority to hear the claims and applied the requirement that a complaint provide enough factual detail to make a claim plausible, rather than merely possible.

The court explained that Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibit workplace discrimination because of protected characteristics and retaliation for opposing unlawful discrimination. To proceed with her federal claims, Powell needed to allege facts plausibly suggesting that her national origin or age played the required role in an adverse employment decision or other actionable conduct. The court found that she alleged bullying and harassment by Simon but did not allege facts suggesting that Powell’s American nationality or age played any role in Simon’s conduct. The court therefore found her discrimination and retaliation allegations under Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act insufficient.

Leave to amend and disposition

The court stated that self-represented plaintiffs generally should receive an opportunity to correct a defective complaint when additional facts might support a valid claim. It granted Powell leave to file a second amended complaint within 60 days. The new complaint must replace, rather than supplement, the amended complaint and must include the relevant people and their titles, the events and approximate dates and locations, Powell’s injuries, and the relief requested.

The order granted leave to amend; it did not state that the action was dismissed at that time. It directed Powell to submit the second amended complaint to the court’s Pro Se Intake Unit, use the specified case number, and label the document “Second Amended Complaint.” No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that if Powell failed to comply within the allowed period and could not show good cause, the action would be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

Names and caption

The opinion’s caption names Archcare at Mary Manning Walsh Nursing Home as the defendant. Adanna Simon is described in the opinion as a co-worker and nurse who sometimes acted as a supervisor, not as the captioned defendant. The supplied short case name refers to Simon, but the opinion’s caption does not.