Federal District Court in Montana Rules on WDEA Case

July 18, 2024

Important Takeaway: The federal district court in Montana granted summary judgment (dismissed the claims without a trial) where there was no evidence of the alleged wrongdoing by the employer.

Facts: Dean Christiaens (Christiaens) worked for CoreCivic of Tennessee in Shelby, Montana as a warehouse manager and unit manager starting in 2015. In 2019, Christiaens started seeing a therapist for anxiety and depression. Christiaens verbally told his supervisors and his coworkers about his mental health therapy appointments. Christiaens would sometimes miss appointments because his supervisors, Chief Henson or Assistant Warden Catherine Nelson, would give an eye roll or a disgusted look when he informed them of an appointment.

Three employees filed separate incident statements complaining of Christiaens’ conduct in April 2020, June 2020, and February 2021. The June 2020 incident statement complained that Christiaens participated in a conversation where a CoreCivic employee referred to another as a “cougar.” There was no documentation of Christiaens being disciplined in relation to any of these incident statements.

In August 2020, Christiaens filed an Employee Grievance complaining that his supervisor Chief Joseph Henson intimidated, threatened, and undermined him. Christiaens alleged this caused him to work in constant fear of losing his job, career, and safety. One supervisor, Peter Bludworth (Bludworth) told Christiaens to file a complaint against him because he believed Bludworth intended to scare him. Christiaens did not file a complaint but was crying in the human resource office for around 30 minutes.

In September 2020, Bludworth witnessed Christiaens suffer a panic attack while at work. Christiaens took an ambulance from work to the hospital because he was unable to complete sentences and was unaware of his surroundings. Christiaens misses two days that month due to depression and anxiety.

In March of 2021, Christiaens allegedly made fun of a Hispanic coworker, Rangle, for how she pronounced some words. Also in March of 2021, CoreCivic staff met to talk about Chrisitaens’ mistreatment of staff. In response to this conversation, staff raised the issue that Christiaens was also allegedly mistreated by others. The staff requested an investigation into the mistreatment allegations. Later that month, Christiaens confided to two coworkers that he had an overnight stay in the hospital for mental health concerns.

In April 2021, CoreCivic put Christiaens on paid administrative leave. His Hispanic coworker then made a written complaint about his behavior generally and him making fun of her English speaking skills. Leo York (York) began an investigation of Christiaens’ alleged retaliation against Rangel for telling her supervisors of her issues with Christiaens. At the request of York, Rangel submitted a retroactive complaint about Christiaens’ teasing about her accent. Christiaens was never disciplined for these complaints.

Christiaens was terminated in July of 2021. Christiaens sued CoreCivic alleging violations of the Montana Human Rights Act, wrongful discharge, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and punitive damages.

The Federal District Court found that under the Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act, wrongful discharge occurs when an employer discharges a non-probationary employee without good cause. CoreCivic contends Christiaens was fired because retaliated against Rangel when he made a comment to another employee that he liked him better because he did not take complaints to “higher-ups.” Christiaens claimed he was discharged because of discriminatory reasons because he was discharged shortly after he had multiple mental health episodes.

The Court found that it was plausible that CoreCivic’s put Christiaens on administrative leave stemmed from a legitimate business reason, such as to ensure a harassment-free workplace for Rangel and other employees. There are also factual questions surrounding whether Christiaens teased Rangel or was helping her learn English. The Court found this claim could not be decided on summary judgment because there were still factual questions. If there are any issues of material fact, the court cannot grant summary judgment.

An employer violates the Montana Human Rights Act when they discriminate in employment against a person because of mental disability. To survive summary judgment, Christiaens had to produce evidence that established a prima facie case of discrimination and produce evidence that raised an inference that the defendant employer’s proffered reasons is pretextual. The Court found that Christiaens had presented evidence that a reasonable jury could find that CoreCivic discriminated against him because CoreCivic regarded Christiaens as significantly restricted in the ability to perform. CoreCivic knew of Christieans’ mental impairments and a factual dispute exists as to the extent CoreCivic believed Christiaens’ mental impairment restricted his ability to perform the functions required of the managerial class of jobs. Summary judgment could not be granted on this claim.

Intentional infliction of emotional distress occurs under Montana law when a defendant’s intentional act or omission causes a plaintiff serious or severe emotional distress that was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the act or omission. Christiaens must prove the emotional distress was so severe that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it. The Court found that the record lacked support for the claim that Christiaens could have suffered serious or severe emotional distress. The instances he pointed to were one time and not continuous. Christiaens also never indicated that he planned to quit his job after any of the alleged actions that caused severe emotional distress. The Court granted summary judgement on the intentional infliction of emotional distress claims in favor of CoreCivic.

Under Montana law, punitive damages are only awarded when a defendant commits actual fraud or actual malice. There is actual fraud when (1) either a defendant makes a representation with knowledge of its falsity or conceals a material fact with the purpose of depriving someone of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury (2) a plaintiff has a right to rely on the representation of a defendant (3) a plaintiff relies on the representation and (4) the plaintiff’s reliance causes the plaintiff injury. All elements of the punitive damages claim must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. This means there is no serious or substantial doubt. The Court found that Christiaens failed to provide evidence to show that CoreCivic deliberately acted in conscious disregard of or indifference to known or intentionally disregarded facts creating a high probability of injury. The Court dismissed the punitive damages claim on summary judgment.

What this means: Under the Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act, wrongful discharge occurs when an employer discharges a non-probationary employee without good cause. An employer should make sure they have documented good cause reasoning before terminating a non-probationary employee. This does not apply if the employee is still within their probationary period.  An employer violates the Montana Human Rights Act when they discriminate in employment against a person because of disability. Intentional infliction of emotional distress occurs under Montana law when a defendant’s intentional act or omission causes a plaintiff serious or severe emotional distress that was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the act or omission. Employers should be careful when responding to employees who are experiencing mental health complications or need to take time off to treat mental health conditions.

About this case: Christiaens v. CoreCivic of Tenn., U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, April 24, 2024. Read it here.

As you consider these and other issues, we recommend you speak with your school lawyer or contact Bea, Megan, Beth, Kevin, and Kali at 406-542-1300 to discuss these issues.