National Litigation Hotline

In affirming a district court's ruling rejecting hostile work environment and retaliation claims brought by three black and one Latina employee against Northeastern Illinois University (“Northeastern”), the Seventh Circuit has found that when harassment is “directed at someone other than the plaintiff, the 'impact of [such] second hand harassment is obviously not as great as the impact of harassment directed at the plaintiff.'” Smith v. Northeastern Illinois University, 2004 WL 2475104 (7th Cir. Nov. 4).

After experiencing years of racially motivated hostile, offensive and intimating behavior, both directly and indirectly, plaintiffs Randy Smith, Victoria Guerrero, Ann Weaver and Elbert Lee Reeves, all employees of Northeastern's Public Safety Department (the “Department”), filed suit against Northeastern and Gerald Leenheer and Kevin Connolly, police officers in the Department. Smith and Reeves, both African-American police officers in the Department, and Weaver, an African-American administrative aide and office manager for the Department, averred that defendants Connolly and Leenheer, both white, discriminated against them based on their race by creating and tolerating a hostile work environment in contravention of 42 U.S.C. ' 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. ' 2000e et seq. Furthermore, Guerrero, who is Latina, joined these three plaintiffs in charging defendants with committing racially motivated retaliation against them in violation of ' 1981 and Title VII. All four plaintiffs also claimed intrusions on their First Amendment Rights and rights under 42 U.S.C. ' 1983 in that they were prevented from grieving defendants' unfair treatment and subjected to a hostile work environment or harassment when they exercised their First Amendment Rights. In response to defendants' motion for summary judgment, the district court dismissed all claims against defendant Connolly and all claims made by Weaver and Guerrero. With respect to Smith and Reeves' claims against defendants Northeastern and Leenheer, a jury found for the defendants. The district court then denied Smith and Reeves' motion for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial. On appeal, Weaver and Guerrero disputed the district court's grant of summary judgment on their hostile work environment and retaliation claims under Title VII, and Smith and Reeves asked for review of the district court's denial of their motion for a new trial. None of the plaintiffs pursued their claims against Connolly on appeal.