Virginia Galaviz v. Post-Newsweek Stations, et al

Filing 511137079

Virginia Galaviz v. Post-Newsweek Stations, et al

Doc. 511137079

Case: 09-50730

Document: 00511137079

Page: 1

Date Filed: 06/09/2010

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
June 9, 2010 N o . 09-50730 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

V IR G IN IA GALAVIZ, P la in t if f - Appellant v. P O S T -N E W S W E E K STATIONS, SAN ANTONIO, INC., doing business as K S A T /T V 12; POST-NEWSWEEK STATIONS, SAN ANTONIO, G.P.; POSTN E W S W E E K STATIONS, SAN ANTONIO, L.P., Defendants - Appellees

A p p e a l from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas U S D C No. 5:08-CV-305

B e fo r e JOLLY, SMITH, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* V a n e s s a Galaviz was a television news reporter for KSAT 1 in San Antonio, T e x a s , until being fired after a domestic dispute that resulted in her arrest and s ig n ific a n t publicity. She appeals the district court's grant of summary

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
1

*

We refer to the defendants collectively under the station's call letters.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 09-50730

Document: 00511137079

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/09/2010

No. 09-50730 ju d g m e n t in favor of KSAT on her claims of Title VII sex discrimination and b r e a c h of contract. We affirm. I. S in c e her hiring, Paragraph 8(a) of her contract, which we will call the m o r a ls clause, has read: I f at any time Employee fails to conduct himself or herself with due r e g a r d to public morals and decency, or if Employee commits any act o r becomes involved in any situation or occurrence tending to d e g r a d e Employee in the community or which brings Employee into p u b lic disrepute, contempt, or scandal, or which materially and a d v e r s e ly affects the reputation or business of [the station] or the s ta n d i n g of [the station] as a broadcast licensee, whether or not in fo r m a tio n in regard thereto becomes public, [the station] shall h a v e the right to terminate the Agreement on twenty-four (24) h o u r s notice to employee. O n August 1, 2007, KSAT fired Galaviz, relying on the morals clause, after she w a s involved in a domestic dispute. T h e incident was her third during her time at KSAT. The first was a July 2 0 0 4 altercation with a San Antonio city councilman whom Galaviz dated. The in c id e n t began with a fight that ended with the two throwing food at each other. S h e began moving out the next day, though they had dinner that night. On the w a y back from dinner, they got into a fight, after which Galaviz decided to go to b e d at the councilman's home. She says he later returned, pushed her, and p o in te d a gun at her, after which police responded to a call reporting a domestic d i s tu r b a n c e . The incident garnered news coverage, some of which questioned t h e ethics of a reporter having a romantic relationship with a city councilman. N o charges were filed against Galaviz, and she says the district attorney c o n s id e r e d her the victim in the case. T h e next incident occurred in early 2006, with a subsequent boyfriend. G a la v iz , it turns out, was not the only woman he was seeing. In her deposition, G a la v iz said the other woman was angry upon finding her at the shared 2

Case: 09-50730

Document: 00511137079

Page: 3

Date Filed: 06/09/2010

No. 09-50730 b o y fr ie n d 's home and called the police. The other woman reported that Galaviz w a s drunk, had a gun, and had destroyed her vehicle. There was apparently no a r r e s t. The final incident--the one that immediately preceded Galaviz's f ir in g -- o c c u r r e d on July 25, 2007, with her fiancé. After an altercation at a d o w n t o w n San Antonio bar, she went home to discover that she had a black eye. S h e went to her fiancé's sister's home to show him her black eye. The fight r e s u m e d , police intervened, and both were arrested. Galaviz spent the night in a holding cell. Like the first incident and unlike the second, this event drew m e d i a attention, including video of Galaviz being led to the magistrate's office in handcuffs. At least some of the coverage identified Galaviz as a KSAT

r e p o r t e r and referred to the 2004 incident with the councilman. K S A T 's news director, who saw the television coverage the night before, m e t with Galaviz and the station's business manager and head of human r e s o u r c e s , the next day. KSAT says they discussed counseling at that meeting a n d at another meeting several days later. On August 1, the news director gave G a la v i z a letter, reading, "KSAT is terminating your employment contract e ffe c ti v e immediately, pursuant to Paragraph 8(a) of the Talent Contract C la u s e s ." Galaviz sued, and the district court granted summary judgment for KSAT, w h ic h Galaviz now appeals. II. G a la v iz raises three objections. First, she says that the morals clause is a m b ig u o u s , creating a factual issue and precluding summary judgment. Second, s h e argues that the district court erred by concluding that no damages flowed fr o m her immediate termination, in violation of the notice provision in the m o r a ls clause. Third, she says that she provided three similarly situated male e m p lo y e e s who were sent to counseling instead of getting fired, making 3

Case: 09-50730

Document: 00511137079

Page: 4

Date Filed: 06/09/2010

No. 09-50730 s u m m a ry judgment on the Title VII claim inappropriate. We reject all three argu m en ts. F irs t, the morals clause, which allows termination for "becom[ing] involved in any situation . . . tending to degrade Employee in the community or which b r in g s Employee into public disrepute, contempt, or scandal, . . . whether or not in fo r m a tio n in regard thereto becomes public," easily covers this case. In the t h ir d incident, Galaviz was arrested for domestic violence, and coverage of the e v e n t included footage of her in handcuffs. Second, summary judgment was appropriate on the notice provision, b e c a u se "when an employment contract requires a certain period of notice, the e m p lo y m e n t may be cancelled on shorter notice or upon none at all if the e m p lo y e e is paid wages or salary for the specified notice period." Hussong v. S c h w a n 's Sales Enters., Inc., 896 S.W.2d 320, 326 (Tex. App.­Houston 1995, no w r it ). We agree with the district court that no evidence suggests KSAT failed t o meet its financial obligations.2 T h ir d , Galaviz has failed to produce any similarly situated male employees r e q u ir e d to show disparate treatment. She points to three who have previous a r r e s ts and were allowed to keep their jobs after counseling, but they are not "n e a r ly identical," as required by our cases. See, e.g., Keelan v. Majesco

S o ftw a r e , Inc., 407 F.3d 332, 345 (5th Cir. 2005). None had as many infractions, a n d none had a job so sensitive to misconduct as Galaviz's position on the police bea t. III. G a la v i z has demonstrated no error in the district court's grant of summary ju d g m e n t. The judgment of the district court is A F F IR M E D .
Galaviz cannot show that she was entitled to severance or assistance in obtaining employment benefits under her contract, so KSAT's failure to provide either is irrelevant.
2

4