IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT of GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION H. ERIK BUTLER, Plaintiff, V. EMORY UNIVERSITY
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION H. ERIK BUTLER, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. § 1:13-cv-00151-TCB-LTW EMORY UNIVERSITY, § § Defendant. § § DEFENDANT EMORY UNIVERSITY’S ANSWER AND DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant Emory University (“Defendant”, “Emory” or the “University”), respectfully submits its Answer and Defenses to the First Amended Complaint for Violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and for Breach of Contract (the “First Amended Complaint”) filed by Plaintiff H. Erik Butler in the above-referenced action. ANSWERS Emory responds to the allegations contained in the numbered paragraphs of the First Amended Complaint as follows: 1. Answering the allegations of Paragraph 1of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that Plaintiff purports to bring this action seeking damages and equitable relief pursuant to Title VII and for breach of contract. Emory denies, however, that any such claims exist or that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief whatsoever. Dr. Butler did not earn tenure at Emory because of legitimate concerns over his disruptive and antagonistic behavior in the Department of German Studies (the “Department”). Except as expressly admitted or otherwise stated herein, Emory denies each and every allegation of Paragraph 1 of the First Amended Complaint. 2. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that this Court (the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia) has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s federal Title VII claims and supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state breach of contract claims. 3. Emory admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of the First Amended Complaint. 4. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that Plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to his religious and national origin discrimination claims (involving the denial of tenure only) by filing a timely charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). However, Emory denies that Plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to his retaliation claim and denies that he filed a timely charge of discrimination with the EEOC asserting a retaliation claim. Emory admits that the EEOC issued a determination that there is reasonable cause to conclude that Plaintiff was discriminated against due to his religion, national origin, and in retaliation for engaging in activities protected by Title VII but denies there was in fact such reasonable cause and denies that the EEOC conducted a fair, thorough, or impartial investigation. Emory further admits that conciliation attempts failed, the EEOC issued Plaintiff a Notice of Right to Sue, and Plaintiff filed this action within 90 days thereof. Except as expressly 2 admitted or otherwise stated herein, Emory denies each and every allegation of Paragraph 4 of the First Amended Complaint. 5. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory states that it is without information or knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation that Plaintiff is Jewish, and such allegation is therefore denied. Emory admits that Plaintiff is an American male. Emory further admits that Plaintiff was an employee of Emory from 2004 through the end of the Spring semester in 2011, though during portions of that period he was on an unpaid leave that he requested. Except as expressly admitted or otherwise stated herein, Emory denies each and every allegation of Paragraph 5 of the First Amended Complaint. 6. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 6 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that it is a private Nonprofit Corporation. Emory admits that it has in excess of 500 full and part time employees, that this Court has jurisdiction over it, and that it was properly served with the First Amended Complaint. 7. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 7 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that it hired Plaintiff for the academic year 2004-2005 as a tenure track Assistant Professor in the Department and that Plaintiff accepted this employment by letter dated February 14, 2004. Emory denies that Plaintiff had an employment contract or that he had any contractual or other right to renewal of his appointment. Emory further admits that both Plaintiff and 3 Professor James Melton were the only American-born tenure track professors in the Department at the time of Plaintiff’s hiring since two other American-born professors in the Department had recently retired, and the remaining tenure-track members were German-born. Emory is without information or knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation that Plaintiff is Jewish, and such allegation is therefore denied. Except as expressly admitted or otherwise stated herein, Emory denies each and every allegation of Paragraph 7 of the First Amended Complaint. 8. Emory denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of the First Amended Complaint. 9. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 9 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that Plaintiff received annual evaluations by the Department Chair in accordance with policies of the University and also its College of Arts and Sciences and that such policies require evaluation in the areas of teaching, research, and service. Except as expressly admitted or otherwise stated herein, Emory denies each and every allegation of Paragraph 9 of the First Amended Complaint. 10. Emory admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of the First Amended Complaint but notes that the quoted language constitutes selected excerpts of the document and that the document as a whole speaks for itself. 4 11. Emory admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 11 of the First Amended Complaint but notes that the quoted language constitutes selected excerpts of the documents and the documents as a whole speak for themselves. 12. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that for the academic year 2006-2007, Dr. Höyng was the Department Chair and that he noted in Dr. Butler’s annual evaluation that there had been a “serious complaint by one student.” Specifically, the student, who required emergency surgery to save the function of his injured right hand, emailed Dr. Butler to alert him of his expected absence. In response, Dr. Butler wrote that the student would need to complete the appropriate paperwork and ended his email sarcastically, writing: “enjoy the pain.” When the student returned from surgery the next week, he met with Dr. Butler to get the assignments he had missed. According to the six-page complaint letter sent by the student’s father to Emory’s President: “Less than a week out of major surgery this German professor, H. Erik Butler PhD., blasted, belittled, and berated him, saying many insulting things including that ‘I have to deal with someone like you every semester,’ and that you are ‘always asking for special needs.’” Near tears, the student met with a member of Emory’s Office of Disability Services (“ODS”) who telephoned Dr. Butler to help resolve the situation. Following that conversation, the ODS employee called Dr. Höyng to report that Dr. Butler had been rude and unprofessional to her. Having been alerted to these complaints, and in an effort to help Dr. Butler, Dr. Höyng privately counseled Dr. Butler that such behavior could jeopardize Dr. Butler’s tenure prospects. Rather than accept the counseling 5 or try to remedy the situation, Dr. Butler reacted to Dr. Höyng in a loud and agitated manner that Dr. Höyng found completely inappropriate. In an email to the student involved, Dr. Butler offered no apology. To the contrary, Dr. Butler denied any impropriety and suggested the student was at fault, writing: “Of course, it is my concern to make allowances for disabilities. Thus, the problem seems to lie elsewhere.” Because neither the student, his father, nor the ODS employee believed Dr. Butler capable of treating the student fairly after this episode, the student requested and received a medical withdrawal from the class. Emory admits that, despite this incident, Dr. Höyng tried to help Dr. Butler on his tenure track, rating Dr. Butler as “meets all expectations” in teaching and “exceptional” in research and service, with an overall rating of “exceptional.” Emory further admits that Dr. Höyng wrote in his annual review letter to Dean Levenduski: “Dr. Butler is more than meeting all the research expectations of a young scholar on tenure-track. In fact, Dr. Butler promises to rise to national and international recognition.” Emory notes that the quoted language constitutes selected excerpts of the documents, and the documents as a whole speak for themselves. Emory further notes that Dr. Höyng consistently rated Dr. Butler’s research very highly, and the quality and content of his research were not the reason for Dr. Höyng’s eventual decision to vote against tenure. There are three separate components to a tenure evaluation: research, teaching, and service, and a successful candidate for tenure must satisfy all three requirements. Under Emory’s policies, “service” expressly “includes displaying a collegial spirit of cooperation and avoidance of disruptive behavior.” Except as expressly admitted or otherwise stated herein, Emory denies each and every allegation of Paragraph 12 of the First Amended Complaint. 6 13. Answering the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 of the First Amended Complaint, Emory admits that Dr. Butler’s annual review for the academic year 2006-2007 was sent to Dean Levenduski in May 2007 and that Dr. Butler requested and was granted an unpaid leave of absence for the 2007-2008 academic year for personal reasons but denies that he was not an employee of Emory during his leave. Emory admits that Dr. Butler was on unpaid leave from Emory for the Fall Semester of the 2007-2008 academic year and that he returned to teach in the Spring of 2008.