This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
Wrongful Termination
Negligent Supervision

Margarita Smith v. Corecivic of Tennessee LLC, and Does 1-25

Published: Sep. 22, 2023 | Result Date: May 4, 2023 | Filing Date: Apr. 29, 2020 |

Case number: 3:20-cv-0808-L-DEB Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

M. James Lorenz

Court

USDC Southern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Joshua D. Gruenberg
(Gruenberg Law)

Colette N. Mahon
(Gruenberg Law)


Defendant

Paul M. Gleason
(Gleason & Favarote LLP)


Facts

CoreCivic of Tennessee, one of the nation's largest private prison firms, operates and owns Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego. In early 2020, Margarita Smith, Gregory Arnold, and Erica Brooks worked for the facility. However, in the spring of that year, they all resigned. Later the three filed separate suits.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs generally alleged that they were forced to resign because of defendant's failure to adequately implement measures to sufficiently mitigate any possible spread of COVID-19. Each plaintiff either had underlying health concerns, family members with health conditions that would make them particularly vulnerable to any potential COVID-19 consequences, or were in dangerous, possible exposure situations. Along with other employees, plaintiffs Smith and Arnold requested or suggested the use of gloves and disinfectant wipes. Plaintiffs Arnold and Brooks asked to wear face masks. Specifically, they brought claims for constructive discharge, negligent supervision, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that constructive discharge claims require employees, arguing as such, establish the intolerable working conditions at the time when they resigned, and here each plaintiff actually resigned with no evidence that plaintiffs intended to permanently leave their employment at the time they took leave: none of the plaintiffs contemplated resigning until the day they resigned or very near that date. Moreover, there was insufficient evidence as to whether the conditions at the time of resignation were intolerable and plaintiffs failed to provide any evidence accordingly.

Result

After the claims for negligent supervision and intentional infliction of emotional distress were independently dismissed, the court granted summary judgment for all remaining constructive discharge claims for the three cases.

Other Information

Related Cases: Gregory Arnold v. Corecivic of Tennessee LLC, and Does 1-25, Case Number: 20-cv-0809-L-DEB Erica Brooks v. Corecivic of Tennessee LLC, and Does 1-25, Case Number: 20-cv-0994-L-DEB


#141487

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390