Hicks v. City Of Tuscaloosa

870 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2017)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P worked for D first as a patrol officer and then as an investigator on the narcotics task force. She was working on the narcotics task force when she became pregnant in January 2012. P's captain allowed her to work on pharmaceutical fraud cases so she could avoid working nights and weekends. Lieutenant Teena Richardson, P's supervisor, admitted that it bothered her that P was allowed to avoid 'on-call' duty. Despite Richardson telling P more than once that she should take only six weeks of FMLA leave, P took twelve weeks of FMLA leave from August 2012 to November 2012. The captain was caught embezzling and was replaced with Captain Wayne Robertson. Prior to her FMLA leave, P's performance review 'exceeded expectations.' On P's first day back from leave, she was written up. She was also told she should start working with five to seven confidential informants. P overheard Richardson talking to Captain Robertson saying 'that bitch,' and claiming she would find a way to write P up and get her out of here. And another officer overheard Richardson talking loudly about P saying 'that stupid cunt thinks she gets 12 weeks. I know for a fact she only gets six.' D claimed that P only met with one informant and never even spoke to the others. D claimed that P did not want to work nights, declined to meet with an informant after hours because she had to pick up her child from daycare, and chose not to attend a drug bust on a Saturday. Captain Robertson met with P to determine why she was not working with the informants. A ride-along with another agent and his informant was arranged. P did not follow up from the ride-along. Captain Robertson requested that Chief Steve Anderson reassign P to the patrol division. P claimed she worked several of the informants, and she was not introduced to the rest by their current agent. P was also warned by another agent that Richardson had it out for her. Chief Anderson met with P only eight days after she returned from FMLA leave. Chief Anderson reassigned her to the patrol division. Chief Anderson testified that he always followed Captain Robertson's recommendations. P lost her vehicle and weekends off, and she was going to receive a pay cut and different job duties. Before she started back in the patrol division, P took time off when a physician diagnosed her with postpartum depression. Richardson admitted that she asked P if she was suffering from postpartum. P's doctor wrote a letter to Chief Anderson recommending that she be considered for alternative duties because the ballistic vest she was now required to wear on patrol duty was restrictive and could cause breast infections that lead to an inability to breastfeed. When she returned from leave, P requested a desk job where she would not be required to wear a vest and assurances that she would be allowed to take breaks to breastfeed. Chief Anderson did not consider breastfeeding a condition that warranted alternative duty. P could not wear a vest or wear one specially fitted. P was told she would be assigned to a beat that allowed her access to lactation rooms, and that she could get priority to take two breastfeeding breaks per shift. It was too dangerous not to wear a vest and specially fitted vests were ineffective because they left gaping, dangerous holes. P resigned that day. P sued D for (1) pregnancy discrimination, (2) constructive discharge, (3) FMLA interference, and (4) FMLA retaliation. The jury awarded P $374,000. The magistrate judge reduced the award to $161,319.92 plus costs and attorneys' fees. D appealed.