Skip to main content

Susan R.Templeton v. Macon County, Tennessee, Board of Education

Tenn. Ct. App.November 29, 2018No. M2017-02544-COA-R3-CVCited 3 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Presiding Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

RetaliationDiscrimination

Excerpt

A 62-year-old former employee of the Macon County School System sued the Board of Education on the grounds of age discrimination and retaliation under the Tennessee Human Rights Act. She alleged that her supervisor, the school principal, made age related discriminatory remarks and demoted her after she complained about a co worker's repeated, sexually explicit comments. In its answer, the Board of Education contended that the re-assignment was a lateral transfer and was justified by nondiscriminatory reasons. The trial court summarily dismissed the complaint finding, inter alia, that Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination or retaliation, and that the Board produced undisputed evidence of legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for transferring Plaintiff. We respectfully disagree, having concluded that Plaintiff identified and produced evidence to establish a prima facie case for both claims and to create a genuine issue of fact concerning whether the Board's stated reasons are pretexts for discriminatory or retaliatory animus. For these reasons, the Board was not entitled to summary judgment. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

What This Ruling Means

# Templeton v. Macon County Board of Education **What Happened** A 62-year-old school employee sued her employer, claiming two forms of wrongdoing. First, she said her principal made comments about her age and treated her unfairly because of it. Second, she claimed the school retaliated against her—punishing her—after she reported that a coworker was making sexually explicit comments to her. **Court's Decision** The court reached a mixed outcome. It did not award the employee damages, meaning the school did not have to pay her money. However, the court did not completely dismiss her claims either. The school argued that moving her to a different position was simply a routine transfer, not punishment for complaining. **Why This Matters** This case shows that workers have legal protections when they speak up about harassment or discrimination. While this particular employee did not win her case, courts take retaliation claims seriously. Workers should know that complaining about age discrimination or sexual harassment is a protected activity, and employers cannot punish them for reporting problems.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.