Filed: Dec. 12, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 12, 2003 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III _ Clerk No. 03-40341 _ PRISCILLA TAYLOR-ROGERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBB & STUCKY, LTD., Defendant - Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division USDC No. 4:01-CV-329 _ Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Priscilla Taylor-Rogers, Plaintiff-
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 12, 2003 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III _ Clerk No. 03-40341 _ PRISCILLA TAYLOR-ROGERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBB & STUCKY, LTD., Defendant - Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division USDC No. 4:01-CV-329 _ Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Priscilla Taylor-Rogers, Plaintiff-A..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 12, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III
_____________________ Clerk
No. 03-40341
_____________________
PRISCILLA TAYLOR-ROGERS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ROBB & STUCKY, LTD.,
Defendant - Appellee.
__________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division
USDC No. 4:01-CV-329
_________________________________________________________________
Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Priscilla Taylor-Rogers, Plaintiff-Appellant, appeals the
district court's grant of summary judgment for Robb & Stucky, Ltd.,
Defendant-Appellee, and consequent dismissal of her sexual
harassment, retaliation, and intentional infliction of emotional
distress claims.
Taylor-Rogers can establish a Title VII violation by producing
evidence that the alleged acts of sex discrimination created a
hostile or abusive work environment. Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v.
*
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Vinson,
477 U.S. 57, 66 (1986). Taylor-Rogers may establish a
hostile work environment under Title VII by showing:
(1) that she belongs to a protected group; (2)
that she was subjected to unwelcome harassment
(3) based upon sex, (4) which affected a term,
condition, or privilege of her employment; and
(5) that her employer knew, or should have
known, of the harassment and failed to take
prompt remedial action.
Skidmore v. Precision Printing and Pkg., Inc.,
188 F.3d 606, 615
(5th Cir. 1999).
The district court granted summary judgment and dismissed
Taylor-Rogers’ sexual harassment claim, concluding that Taylor-
Rogers had not created a genuine issue of material fact as to
whether the harassment was severe or pervasive and whether Robb &
Stucky knew or should have known of the harassment. We
respectfully disagree.
Taylor-Rogers presented evidence that a co-employee, Ruggeri,
(1) rubbed up against her on a daily basis, (2) simulated a sex act
with her, (3) made sexually suggestive comments to her, (4) touched
her, and (5) unbuttoned her blouse and touched her breast
underneath her bra. All of these acts occurred over a period of
about six months. This evidence is sufficient to create a genuine
issue of material fact as to the severity and pervasiveness of the
harassment. FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c).
Taylor-Rogers similarly created a genuine issue of material
fact as to whether Robb & Stucky knew of the harassment.
Id.
Taylor-Rogers presented evidence that the harassment took place on
2
the showroom floor, in front of customers and management, and that
she reported the harassment to the store’s human resources
representative.
For these reasons we REVERSE the district court’s dismissal of
Taylor-Rogers’ sexual harassment claim and REMAND for further
proceedings on that claim alone. In all other respects, including
her discharge, the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED and REMANDED in part.
3