Lunsford v. Mid-South Waffles, Inc. et al

Filing 17

*DISREGARD - DUPLICATE ENTRY - SEE DE#16* INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: Motion to Amend Pleadings due by 4/1/2014. Discovery due by 8/15/2014. Dispositive Motions due by 10/1/2014. Jury Trial set for 3/3/2015 at 9:00 AM before Senior Judge John T. N ixon. Pretrial Conference set for 2/20/2015 at 10:00 AM before Senior Judge John T. Nixon. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 1/27/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt) Modified Text 1/28/2014 (dt).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
ROBERT LUNSFORD,
Plaintiff,
v.
MID SOUTH WAFFLES, INC. and
WAFFLE HOUSE, INC.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-01269
JUDGE NIXON
Magistrate Judge Bryant

_________
PROPOSED INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
Come now the parties, through counsel, and file this Proposed Case Management Order.
Pursuant to Local Rule 16.01, the following Initial Case Management Plan is adopted.
1.

Jurisdiction and Venue
This Court has jurisdiction of plaintiff’s claims brought in the original complaint under

28 U.S.C. § 1332. Plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to file a first amended complaint
asserting claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e,
et seq. (Title VII). The Court has jurisdiction over the Title VII claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1331
and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(4). Jurisdiction and venue are not disputed.
2.

Theories of the Case
A.

Plaintiff’s Theory of the Case

This is an action for damages and equitable relief for racial harassment, race and gender
discrimination, and retaliation brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (Title VII), and the Tennessee Human Rights Act, § 4-21101 et seq. (THRA). Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a cook at the Waffle House Restaurant
N BMB01 1000235 v3
2907909-000018 01/22/2014

located in Goodlettsville/Millersville, Sumner County, Tennessee beginning in January 2012.
During the course of his employment, plaintiff was subjected to a racially hostile work
environment, by the use of offensive racial language, including the use of the terms “nigga” and
“nigger,” by two female co-workers. Plaintiff complained on several occasions to management
about the hostile work environment but management did not take prompt or appropriate remedial
action to end the harassment. Ultimately, after Plaintiff complained to Defendants’ Hotline,
management suspended Plaintiff during a purported but untimely investigation of Plaintiff’s
complaints, and Plaintiff was told he would be contacted about returning to work at the
conclusion of the investigation. Plaintiff was notified by letter dated November 23, 2012 that the
investigation was completed, but Plaintiff was not returned to work and was instead terminated
from his job. The white, female employees who engaged in the racial harassment of Plaintiff
were not terminated.
Plaintiff was terminated from his job in retaliation for his protected activity of
complaining about a racially hostile work environment in violation of Title VII and the THRA.
Plaintiff was subjected to a racially hostile work environment in violation of Title VII. Plaintiff
was treated differently than similarly situated white female employees and was discriminated
against because of race and/or gender in violation of Title VII.
B.

Defendants’ Theory of the Case

Defendant Mid South Waffles, Inc. (“Defendant Mid South”) was Plaintiff’s only
employer and is the only proper defendant in this action. Defendant Waffle House, Inc. was not
Plaintiff’s employer and cannot be held liable under any of Plaintiff’s theories or claims as a
matter of law.

2
N BMB01 1000235 v3
2907909-000018 01/22/2014

Defendant Mid South promptly and fully investigated multiple complaints filed by and
against Plaintiff.

The complaints lodged by Plaintiff contained no credible evidence of

discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or violations of Defendant Mid South’s company
policies. In contrast, Defendant Mid South found evidence showing that Plaintiff used racial and
sexually charged language in remarks toward his co-workers, all in violation of Defendant Mid
South’s company policies. Plaintiff’s employment was terminated based on his violations of
Defendant Mid South’s attendance policy. His race, gender, and filing of complaints (albeit
baseless) had nothing whatsoever to do with his termination. Defendants deny Plaintiff was
discriminated or retaliated against in any way.
3.

Identification of the Issues
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint has not been ruled on.

The issues of jurisdiction and venue have been resolved. Service of process is not disputed. The
issues of liability and damages remain for resolution before the Court and/or jury.
4.

Status of Response Pleadings and Service of Process
Plaintiff filed his complaint in the Circuit Court of Sumner County, Tennessee on

October 8, 2013. Proper service was made on Defendants. Defendants removed the case to this
Court on November 15, 2013. Defendants filed their answer to the complaint on November 22,
2013. Defendants filed an amended answer on November 27, 2013. After receiving a Right to
Sue Notice from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff filed a Motion for
Leave to File First Amended Complaint on December 11, 2013. Defendants did not file a
response to the Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint.
5.

Need for Other Claims or Special Issues under Rules 13-15 and 17-21 and Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 23
None.
3

N BMB01 1000235 v3
2907909-000018 01/22/2014

6.

Mandatory Initial Disclosures
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1), the parties are prepared to exchange their mandatory

initial disclosures on or before February 26, 2014.
7.

Discovery
All fact discovery shall be completed by August 15, 2014. All discovery related motions

shall be filed no later than August 22, 2014. Before filing any discovery-related motion, the
parties will schedule and conduct a telephone conference with the Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiffs shall reveal any expert witnesses they intend to use at trial, including reports
required pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, on or before July 15, 2014. Defendants shall make their
responsive disclosures, if any, on or before August 15, 2014.
All expert witness depositions shall be completed by September 15, 2014.
8.

Dispositive Motions
Any dispositive motions shall be filed by October 1, 2014. The non-moving party shall

file a response by November 3, 2014. All replies, if any, shall be filed by November 17, 2014.
If dispositive motions are filed early, the response and reply dates shall move up accordingly.
Any motion and response memoranda are limited to twenty-five pages, and replies, if
any, are limited to five pages, absent Court permission for longer pleading.
9.

Other Deadlines
Any further motions to amend and/or to add additional parties shall be made by April 1,

2014.
10.

Trial Date
Jury trial is set to begin on March 3, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. A pretrial conference shall be held on

February 20, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. before Senior Judge Nixon. Trial is expected to take 3 days.
4
N BMB01 1000235 v3
2907909-000018 01/22/2014

11.

Other Issues and Matters
Third Party Document Subpoenas
In accordance with Rule 45(a)(4), any party wishing to serve a third party document

subpoena shall provide the other party with notice and a copy of the proposed subpoena five days
before the subpoena is to be served.
Electronic discovery
The parties do not anticipate that electronic discovery is necessary in this case, but to the
extent it is necessary they will agree on how to conduct electronic discovery. Thus, the default
standard contained in Administrative Order No. 174 need not apply to this case.

It is so ORDERED.
January 27, 2014
Entered _________________________

s/ John S. Bryant
____________________________________
Honorable John S. Bryant
United States Magistrate Judge

5
N BMB01 1000235 v3
2907909-000018 01/22/2014

APPROVED FOR ENTRY:

/s/ Wade B. Cowan (w/ permission BMB)
Wade B. Cowan (S.C. #9403)
Suite 300
85 White Bridge Road
Nashville, Tennessee 37205
[phone]
[e-mail]

________

/s/ Kenneth M. Switzer (w/ permission BMB)________
Kenneth M. Switzer (BPR No. 5785)
Howard, Tate, Sowell, Wilson,
Leathers & Johnson, PLLC
201 Fourth Ave. North, Suite 1900
Nashville, TN 37219
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff

/s/ Bradley M. Bakker______________________
Bradley M. Bakker, BPR No. 028380
Baker Donelson Center, Suite 800
211 Commerce Street
Nashville, Tennessee 37201
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
David Gevertz, GA Bar No. 292430
admitted pro hac vice
3414 Peachtree Road, NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30326
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants

6
N BMB01 1000235 v3
2907909-000018 01/22/2014