SNOW et al v. CIRRUS EDUCATION GROUP, INC.

Filing 19

ORDER DENYING 7 MOTION TO DISMISS Plaintiffs' Title VII hostile work environment claims filed by CIRRUS EDUCATION GROUP, INC. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC THOMAS TREADWELL on 12/19/2017. (tlh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
GINGER SNOW AND SUSAN
CAMPBELL,
Plaintiffs,
v.

CIRRUS EDUCATION GROUP, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-CV-208 (MTT)

ORDER
At the December 19, 2017 hearing, the Court informed the parties that it would
deny Cirrus Academy’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Snow’s and
Campbell’s hostile work environment claims. Doc. 7. This Order explains why.
I. DISCUSSION
To establish a prima facie case of racially hostile work environment, a plaintiff
must show that: (1) she belongs to a protected group; (2) she has been subject to
unwelcome harassment; (3) the harassment was based on her race; (4) 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 exists for
holding the employer liable. Jones v. UPS Ground Freight, 683 F.3d 1283, 1292 (11th
Cir. 2012) (citation omitted).
Here, the Plaintiffs are two white females who were allegedly harassed during
their employment at Cirrus Academy. Docs. 1 ¶¶ 8-9; 16 ¶¶ 8-9. Specifically, in their

initial and amended complaint,1 the Plaintiffs plausibly allege that “[i]n approximately
November through December of 2016,” they began receiving racially hostile text
messages from their co-workers, referring to them as “white bitches,” “crackers,” “Hitler
lovers,” and “white nazis,” and stating “black power” and that Cirrus Academy would be
an “all black school” once “we get the whites out.” Id. ¶¶ 18-19. The messages also
allegedly threatened the Plaintiffs and their families with violence if they reported the
harassment. Id. ¶ 19. The Plaintiffs reported the alleged racial harassment to their
supervisors but claim that no action was taken to remedy the harassment. Id. ¶¶ 20, 22.
Clearly from these facts, the Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged their hostile work
environment claims.
II. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, Cirrus Academy’s motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Title VII hostile
work environment claims (Doc. 7) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this the 19th day of December, 2017.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1

The amended complaint contains the exact same hostile work environment claim allegations. Doc. 16.

-2-