PITTSBURGH – An African-American man’s claims of racial discrimination surrounding his time as an auto detailer for a Pittsburgh-area business have been settled.
George Smith first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on July 20, 2022 versus Team Nutz, LLC. Both parties are of Pittsburgh.
(The case was later removed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 8, 2022.)
“Plaintiff is an African-American male. Defendant operates two facilities – one in the Fox Chapel neighborhood of Pittsburgh and the other in Castle Shannon. On or around December 2017 or January 2018, plaintiff was hired by defendant as a full time auto-detailer. Originally, plaintiff was hired to work at defendant’s Fox Chapel facility but later was transferred to the Castle Shannon facility. At the Castle Shannon facility, plaintiff immediately observed a pattern and practice of discrimination and harassment directed to African-Americans and/or colored employees,” the suit said.
“This behavior and conduct was in stark contrast to the treatment that the Caucasian employees received. The primary culprit of this disparate treatment was Ms. Nuttall, who plaintiff believes and therefore avers to be a proprietor of the business. Plaintiff observed his manager Ms. Nuttall make snide comments toward him when nearby or when plaintiff was on lunch breaks. Furthermore, Ms. Nuttall targeted plaintiff and assigned him the more unpleasant job responsibilities or tasks, which were often referred to as ‘dirty jobs’. In comparison, Ms. Nuttall did not assign such unpleasant tasks to plaintiff’s Caucasian co-workers. In addition, Ms. Nuttall would harass and berate plaintiff during his lunch breaks. In comparison, Ms. Nuttall did not so harass and berate plaintiff’s Caucasian co-workers while they were on their lunch breaks.”
The suit added that Nuttall verbally berated him on two separate occasions, which the plaintiff feels were racially motivated.
“After being verbally accosted, plaintiff clocked out and attempted to contact the general manager at the Fox Chapel facility to report that he was instructed to report to work at that location. Plaintiff thereafter made repeated calls to defendant and requested clarification as to where and when he was supposed to work. Defendant ignored plaintiff’s efforts to contact them concerning his employment and Ms. Nuttall’s behavior. Finally, as pay day was approaching, plaintiff called and asked which location he should report to pick up his check,” the suit stated.
“Defendant thereafter returned plaintiff’s call and advised him not to come to any location as his check had been mailed to him. Plaintiff thereafter requested clarification as to where and when he should report to work. Defendant refused to answer plaintiff’s inquiries. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers no Caucasian employees were subjected to similar harassment and discrimination. Plaintiff believes that defendant terminated him on the basis of his race and/or color.”
In a dismissal motion response filed on Sept. 7, 2022, the defendant company said that, at best, Smith showed that Nuttall “was rude, that she made two specific insulting comments at work that were not related to his race or skin color, and that he had to perform certain job duties he did not like” – but not did evince any proof of racial discrimination.
In a Feb. 6 memorandum opinion, U.S. Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
“Upon review, the Court finds that assuming the veracity of plaintiff’s allegations of discrimination, primarily in the form of disparate treatment based on race, and deriving all reasonable inferences therefrom, plaintiff has pled sufficient facts to support his claim for racial discrimination under Title VII and the PHRA, at this initial stage of the proceedings. Construing the facts in light most favorable to plaintiff, as the Court must at this early stage of the case, plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts as to requisite elements of a hostile work environment claim,” Kelly said.
“First, he has alleged that he suffered intentional disparate treatment based on his race that Caucasian employees were not subjected to. Second, he has alleged, albeit barely, that the conduct was severe and pervasive in that he was subjected to the treatment (specifically identified acts) on a daily basis and the conduct interfered with his ability to perform his work. As to the third and fourth elements, he has alleged how the hostile treatment detrimentally affected him and would affect a reasonable person of plaintiff’s race. Finally, plaintiff has alleged that the treatment and the hostile environment inflicted upon him were created by Ms. Nuttall as the defendant owner’s wife and manager of the Castle Shannon location.”
UPDATE
Kelly ordered the case would be administratively closed on June 5, due to a settlement being arrived at during a recent mediation session. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
“This action has been resolved and the only matter remaining to be completed is the submission of a stipulation for dismissal. It is hereby ordered that the Clerk mark the above-captioned action closed. It is further ordered that the Court expressly retains jurisdiction of this matter to consider any issue arising during the period when such stipulation is being finalized, including but not limited to enforcing any settlement,” Kelly said.
The plaintiff was represented by David M. Kobylinski and Peter M. Kobylinski of Praetorian Law Group, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant was represented by Alexandra Nicole Boyer, Scott R. Leah and Jeremy V. Farrell of Tucker Arensberg, also in Pittsburgh.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:22-cv-01150
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-20-008351
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com