Wilson v. The Birmingham Public Library Foundation et al

Filing 31

MOTION for Summary Judgment by Birmingham Library Board, City of Birmingham, Alabama, The. (Fullerton, Frederic)

FILED
2011 Jul-20 AM 07:55
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
BARBARA ANN WILSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF BIRMINGHAM, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
CV-10-KOB-2386

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The Defendants, the City of Birmingham, a municipal corporation under the
laws of the State of Alabama, and the Birmingham Library Board, by and through their
attorney of record, in the above-styled cause, and move this Honorable Court to grant
summary judgment in their favor as to all claims in plaintiff’s complaint, and as
grounds therefore, say as follows:
1.

The complaint fails to state a claim against the Defendants upon which
relief may be granted.

2.

There is no genuine issue as to any material fact and Defendants are
entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

3.

The plaintiff failed to allege, against the defendants, violations of clearly
established constitutional and federal statutory rights. The plaintiff’s
1

allegations do not give rise to violations of any rights under the U.S.
Constitution.
4.

The Defendants did not deprive the plaintiff of any constitutional or
federally protected right.

5.

The Plaintiff cannot prove a hostile work environment as she cannot
show one or more of the following: (1) that he or she belongs to a
protected group, (2) that the employee has been subject to unwelcome
sexual harassment, such as sexual advances, requests for sexual favors,
and other conduct of a sexual nature, (3) that the harassment must have
been based on the sex of the employee, (4) that the harassment was
sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of
employment and create a discriminatorily abusive working environment,
and (5) a basis for holding the employer liable. Civil Rights Act of 1964,
§ 703(a)(1), 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-2(a)(1).

6.

The Plaintiff has failed to prove a violation of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e) et. seq. and the
Civil Rights Act of 1991

7.

Defendant, Birmingham Library Board, is a Department of the City of
Birmingham. Any and all claims against it are due to be dismissed.
2

White v. Birchfield, 582 So. 2nd 1085, (Ala. 1991), Dean v. Barber, 951
F.2d 1210 (11th Cir. 1992)..
8.

The Defendants denies it can be liable for punitive damages for federal
and state claims. City of Newport News v. Facts Concerts, 453 U.S.
247, 101 S. Ct. 2748 (1981).

9.

The Defendants have disseminated written policies prohibiting sex
discrimination, harassment and retaliation.

10.

The Defendants have disseminated written policies concerning internet
access and patron behavior.

11.

Defendants rely upon the pleadings, their Memorandum Brief, and
exhibits in support of this Motion.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/Fredric L. Fullerton, II
Fredric L. Fullerton, II
Assistant City Attorney

City of Birmingham Law Department
600 City Hall, 710 North 20th Street
Birmingham, Alabama 35203
[phone]/[phone] FAX

3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on July 20, 2011 I electronically filed the foregoing with the
Clerk of the Court using the e-filing system which will send notification to the
following:
Adam P. Morel, Esq.
517 Beacon Parkway West
Birmingham, AL. 35209
/s/Fredric L. Fullerton, II
Of Counsel

4