Price v. Grasonville Volunteer Fire Department

Filing 84

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 8/17/2016. (bas, Deputy Clerk)

\-";..

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

*
*

OSCARPRlCE

*

*
*

v.
GRASONVILLE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT.

Civil No. - ELH-14-1989

*

******
MEMORANDUM

Discovery has now been completed, and defendant has moved for summary judgment.
The motion will be denied.
As to the question of whether plaintiff was "employed by" defendant, Judge Hollander
has previously ruled that a factual question is presented under Haavistola v. Cmty. Fire Co. of
Rising Sun, 6 F.3d 211 (4th Cir. 1993). See also Finkle v. Howard County, Md., 12 F. Supp. 3d
780, 784-86 (D. Md. 2014). But ef Evans v. Wilkinson, 609 F. Supp. 2d 489 (D. Md. 2009). Her
ruling remains dispositive.
The alleged facts that (1) the words "nigger," and "boogie" were frequently used by other
volunteer firefighters, including those who led GVFD, to refer to plaintiff, (2) members of
GVFD urinated in plaintiffs protective gear, (3) plaintiffs protective gear was moved from the
front of the department's premises and eventually locked up, (4) plaintiff was forced to sue the
department to obtain payment for snow removal performances he had performed, and (5)
plaintiffs ballot was torn up and discarded because, as allegedly stated by the department's
president, "we are not going to accept these votes from no nigger," are sufficient to demonstrate
that plaintiff was discriminated against because of his race.

1

I

\

..

I

f'~

It appears that any claim that plaintiff might have under 42 U.S.c.

S 1981 is time

barred

because he learned that his protective gear had been removed more than four years prior to the
institution of this suit. However, that is an issue that can best be resolved at trial.
A separate order denying defendant's motion for summary judgment is being entered
herewith.

Date:

r//'1//~

2