Turner v. West Memphis City of

Filing 34

ORDER denying 33 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 8/29/2016. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION KEYA TURNER v. PLAINTIFF No. 3:15CV00093 JLH CITY OF WEST MEMPHIS DEFENDANT ORDER The City of West Memphis has filed a motion for reconsideration of the Opinion and Order denying summary judgment issued earlier today. The City complains that the Court first had to determine who was the “department head” before determining who was the “supervisor in the chain of command,” and the City contends that the Court never addressed the first issue. The City maintains that Phillip Sorrell was the “department head” to whom the City’s harassment policy required Turner to report, whereas Turner maintains that L.T., as the Sanitation Superintendent, was the department head, which meant that Jackson was designated to receive Turner’s complaint as the “supervisor in the chain of command.” First, the City’s personnel manual fails to define who is the “department head” and who is the “supervisor in the chain of command.” See Document #25-4 at 73-94. Second, the personnel manual refers to the “department head” in providing that “[t]he immediate supervisor or department head will initiate disciplinary action.” Document #25-4 at 80. L.T. testified that he and Jackson are responsible for discipline within the sanitation department. Document #25-2 at 13-14. In the absence of a definition and in light of L.T.’s testimony, a jury reasonably could conclude that L.T., the Sanitation Superintendent, was Turner’s “department head” and that Jackson, the Sanitation Foreman, was the “supervisor in the chain of command.” The motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Document #33. IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of August, 2016. __________________________________ J. LEON HOLMES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?