Plaintiff Natalie Moussa sued defendant Advent Health South Overland Park, Inc. in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, raising claims of color and national origin discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII. Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims under Rule 12(b)(6).
Factual Overview
Plaintiff, an emergency room registered nurse of Egyptian descent with dark brown skin, began working for Defendant in October 2021. Starting in early 2022, Plaintiff experienced discriminatory comments from patients and her charge nurse, Diane Amos, based on her skin color and national origin. Plaintiff reported these incidents to management, but no action was taken. Plaintiff endured additional discriminatory remarks from other nurses. In early 2023, Plaintiff complained to Lauren Stillwell that she felt unsafe at work. In March 2023, Ms. Stillwell and Aubrey Winegarner told Plaintiff that based on her face, it did not seem like she cared about patient safety. On April 17, 2023, Plaintiff was terminated for alleged policy violations, which Plaintiff claims were untrue and not fully investigated.
Legal Analysis
Discrimination: The court found that Plaintiff failed to plausibly allege that her termination took place under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination based on her color or national origin. The court determined that the alleged discriminatory comments were either too remote in time, made by non-decisionmakers, or too vague to support an inference of discriminatory intent in her termination.
Hostile Work Environment: The court denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim. Viewing the allegations in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, the court found that Plaintiff sufficiently alleged she was subjected to pervasive harassment based on her color and/or national origin, which altered the terms and conditions of her employment.
Retaliation: The court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s retaliation claim. The court concluded that Plaintiff’s complaints to management about bullying and feeling unsafe did not constitute protected activity under Title VII because they did not specifically oppose discrimination based on color or national origin. Additionally, the court found that Plaintiff failed to establish a causal connection between her March 2022 complaint and her April 2023 termination.
The court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s discrimination and retaliation claims but denied the motion with respect to Plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim.
Schrag on Law 