Watkins v. Recreation and Park Commission for the City of Baton Rouge, et al

Filing 56

RULING and ORDER: The 22 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted on the plaintiff's claims under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), and the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law, LSA-R.S. 23:332, for disparate treatment and hostile work environment based on race, and the plaintiff's retaliation claim under Title VII. The parties shall have until 12/23/2013 to file a supplemental memorandum and direct the court's attention to any specific evidence in the summary judgment materials they contend is relevant to the determination of whether there is a genuine dispute for trial on the plaintiff's claim under LSA-R.S. 23:967. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 12/13/2013. (NLT)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

WARREN R. WATKINS
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NUMBER 12-366-SCR
RECREATION AND PARK
COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
BATON ROUGE
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
and
ORDER SETTING TIME TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDA
Before the court is the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by
defendant Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East
Baton Rouge (“BREC”).

Record document number 22.

The motion is

opposed.1
Plaintiff Warren R. Watkins filed a Complaint against the
defendant for claims arising out of his employment with BREC as a
welder from July 2004 to March 28, 2012.

Plaintiff alleged claims

under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), for disparate treatment
and hostile work environment based on race, and also alleged a
retaliation claim under Title VII.
law

claims

for

discrimination

and

Plaintiff also alleged state
retaliation

under

LSA-R.S.

23:332, the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law (“LEDL”), and
under La.R.S. 23:967, the Louisiana Whistleblower statute.
All of the arguments and competent summary evidence submitted
1

Record document number 42. Defendant BREC filed a reply
memorandum. Record document number 48.

by the parties have been reviewed and carefully considered.

Based

on the applicable law and the summary judgment evidence, the
defendant has demonstrated that there is no genuine dispute for
trial as to the plaintiff’s race discrimination claims under Title
VII and the LEDL, and his Title VII retaliation claim.
Defendant did not specifically move for summary judgment on
the

plaintiff’s

23:967.

state

law

whistleblower

claim

under

LSA-R.S.

However, the applicable law and the summary judgment

record also appears to support summary judgment on this claim, and
the court is considering granting summary judgment to the defendant
on the claim.

Such a finding cannot be made without giving the

parties a reasonable time to respond as provided under Rule 56(f),
Fed.R.Civ.P.
Accordingly,

the

Motion

for

Summary

Judgment

filed

by

defendant Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East
Baton Rouge is granted on the plaintiff’s claims under Title VII,
42

U.S.C.

§

2000e-2(a)(1),

and

the

Louisiana

Employment

Discrimination Law, LSA-R.S. 23:332, for disparate treatment and
hostile

work

environment

based

on

race,

and

the

plaintiff’s

retaliation claim under Title VII.
Furthermore;
IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall have until December 23,
2013 to file a supplemental memorandum and direct the court’s
attention

to

any

specific

evidence

2

in

the

summary

judgment

materials they contend is relevant to the determination of whether
there is a genuine dispute for trial on the plaintiff’s claim under
LSA-R.S. 23:967.
A detailed summary judgment ruling, on the claims dismissed
herein as well as the claim under LSA-R.S. 23:967, will be issued
after the court receives any memoranda filed by the parties in
connection with the plaintiff’s state law whistleblower claim.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, December 13, 2013.

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3