Victoria Zetwick v. County of Yolo
2017 WL 710476, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3260, 850 F.3d 436 (2017)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A long-term pattern of unwelcome physical conduct by a supervisor, such as repeated hugging, can be sufficiently pervasive to create an objectively hostile work environment under Title VII, and the determination of whether it alters the conditions of employment is a question of fact for a jury.
Facts:
- Victoria Zetwick began working as a correctional officer for Yolo County in 1988.
- In 1999, Edward G. Prieto was elected county sheriff and became Zetwick's highest-ranking supervisor.
- From 1999 to 2012, Prieto allegedly subjected Zetwick to numerous unwelcome hugs; she estimated over a hundred hugs between 2003 and 2011.
- In May 2003, at an awards ceremony, Prieto kissed Zetwick on or partially on the lips.
- Zetwick reported the kiss to her supervising lieutenants, who took no action, and she was subsequently teased by co-workers about Prieto's behavior.
- Zetwick observed Prieto frequently hugging and kissing other female employees but not male employees, whom he typically greeted with a handshake.
- Due to Prieto's conduct, Zetwick experienced stress, anxiety, and sleep loss, which caused her to cry at work and take sleep aids.
- In 2010, Prieto acknowledged to Zetwick that people had complained about his hugging, but proceeded to hug her and another female sergeant anyway.
Procedural Posture:
- Victoria Zetwick filed a lawsuit against Sheriff Edward G. Prieto and the County of Yolo in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, the trial court of first instance.
- Zetwick alleged sexual harassment in violation of Title VII and California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).
- The defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, asking the court to dismiss the case without a trial.
- The district court granted the defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissed all of Zetwick's claims.
- Zetwick, as the appellant, appealed the district court's judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a sheriff's alleged conduct of hugging a subordinate female correctional officer over one hundred times and kissing her at least once over a 12-year period create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a hostile work environment under Title VII?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Bennett
Yes, the alleged conduct creates a genuine issue of material fact as to whether a hostile work environment existed. A reasonable juror could find that the sheriff's conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment. The district court erred by applying an incorrect legal standard requiring conduct to be 'severe and pervasive' rather than 'severe or pervasive.' Furthermore, the district court improperly dismissed the claim by creating a black-letter rule that hugs are common workplace behavior, instead of considering the 'totality of the circumstances.' This includes the cumulative effect of the conduct over time, the high frequency of the hugs, the harasser's status as the highest-ranking supervisor, and evidence of similar conduct towards other female employees. Such factual disputes and credibility determinations are for a jury to resolve, not a judge on a motion for summary judgment.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces that hostile work environment claims based on a series of seemingly minor acts of physical contact should not be dismissed at the summary judgment stage. It clarifies that the 'severe or pervasive' standard is disjunctive ('or,' not 'and') and requires courts to evaluate the 'totality of the circumstances' from the perspective of a reasonable person. The case underscores the significance of power dynamics, holding that harassment by a high-level supervisor is inherently more threatening and impactful. This precedent makes it more difficult for defendants to defeat harassment claims by arguing that individual acts of non-violent physical contact are innocuous when they form a long-standing and frequent pattern of unwelcome behavior.
