Home/Court of Appeals of Tennessee/Sandy Sanders v. David W. Lanier, In his individual and in his offical capacities, and the State of Tennessee

Sandy Sanders v. David W. Lanier, In his individual and in his offical capacities, and the State of Tennessee

CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedDecember 4, 2001
Docket02A01-9412-CH-00276
StatusPublished

This text of Sandy Sanders v. David W. Lanier, In his individual and in his offical capacities, and the State of Tennessee (Sandy Sanders v. David W. Lanier, In his individual and in his offical capacities, and the State of Tennessee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sandy Sanders v. David W. Lanier, In his individual and in his offical capacities, and the State of Tennessee, (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

WESTERN SECTI ON AT JACKSON FILED December 4, _______________________________ 2001

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk

SANDY SANDERS, ) Dye r Cha nc e r y Cour t ) No. 93- 166 Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt , ) ) v. ) ) DAVI D W LANI ER, I N HI S . ) I NDI VI DUAL AND I N HI S ) OFFI CI AL CAPACI TI ES, AND ) C/ A NO. 02A01- 9412- CH- 00276 THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) De f e nda nt s - Appe l l e e s . ) _ _ _ _ _ _ ______________________________________________________ _ _

Fr o m t he Cha nc e r y Cour t of Dye r Count y a t Dye r s bur g, Ho no r a bl e W l l i am H. I nm i an, Se ni or Judge , Si t t i ng by De s i g nat i on.

J e r r ol d L. Be c ke r a nd Sc ar l e t t A. Be at y, LOCKRI DGE, BECKER & VALONE, P. C. , Knoxvi l l e , Te nne s s e e , At t or n e y f or Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt .

Cha r l e s W Bur s on, At t or ne y Ge ne r a l a nd Re por t e r , a nd . S. El i z abe t h M t i n, As s i s t a nt At t or ne y Ge ne r a l , Na s hvi l l e , ar Te nn e s s e e , Fo r Ap pe l l e e , St a t e of Te nne s s e e .

OPI NI ON FI LED:

REVERSED AND REMANDED FRANKS, J.

CRAWFORD, P. J. ( W S. ) : ( Conc ur s ) . FARMER, J . : ( Conc ur s )

Pl a i nt i f f ’ s a c t i on f i l e d a ga i ns t t he St a t e pur s ua n t

t o t h e Te nne s s e e Huma n Ri ght s Ac t ( THRA) , Te nne s s e e Code

An n o t a t e d §4- 20- 191, e t s e q. , wa s di s mi s s e d by t he Tr i a l J u d g e

f o r f a i l ur e t o s t a t e a c a us e of a c t i on. T. R. C. P. Rul e

1 2 . 0 2 ( 6) .

Pl a i nt i f f a l l e ge d s he i s e mpl oye d a s a Yout h

Se r v i c e s Of f i c e r wi t h t he J uve ni l e Cour t of Dye r Count y,

Te n n e s s e e . Thi s pos i t i on i s c ompe ns a t e d by t he Count y 1 . Sh e

a l l e ge d t ha t s he wa s s e xua l l y ha r a s s e d by Cha nc e l l or Da vi d

La n i e r , a St a t e j udge , who pr e s i de d ove r bot h Cha nc e r y a nd

Co u n t y J uve ni l e Cour t 2 . She a ve r s t ha t whe n s he r e j e c t e d h i s

1 T. C. A. §37- 1- 106.

2 1 9 7 2 P u b l i c Ac t s 1 6 7 6 - 1 6 8 0 , Ch . 8 6 3 ( c r e a t i n g a l a w a n d e q u i t y c o u r t i n Dy e r Co u n t y , TN) r e a d s i n p a r t :

Se c t i o n 1 . Th e r e i s h e r e b y c r e a t e d t h e La w a n d Eq u i t y Co u r t f o r Dy e r Co u n t y , Te n n e s s e e , t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f wh i c h s h a l l b e c o - e x t e n s i v e wi t h Dy e r Co u n t y .

Se c t i o n 2 . Th e La w a n d E q u i t y Co u r t f o r Dy e r Co u n t y s h a l l h a v e c o n c u r r e n t j u r i s d i c t i o n wi t h t h e Ch a n c e r y Co u r t o f Dy e r Co u n t y a n d t h e Ci r c u i t Co u r t o f Dy e r Co u n t y , a n d s a i d Co u r t a n d t h e J u d g e t h e r e o f s h a l l b e v e s t e d wi t h a l l t h e c o mmo n l a w a n d s t a t u t o r y p o we r s o f t h e Ch a n c e r y Co u r t s , a n d t h e Ci r c u i t a n d L a w Co u r t s , a n d t h e j u d g e s t h e r e o f . . .

Se c t i o n 1 1 . Th e J u d g e o f t h e La w a n d E q u i t y Co u r t o f Dy e r Co u n t y , Te n n e s s e e s h a l l h a v e a n d e x e r c i s e a l l p r o b a t e j ur i s di c t i on and a l l j uve ni l e j ur i s di c t i on of al l j uve ni l e c a s e s a r i s i n g wi t h i n Dy e r Co u n t y , Te n n e s s e e , a n d t h e Co u n t y Cl e r k o f Dy e r Co u n t y , Te n n e s s e e s h a l l c o n t i n u e t o ma i n t a i n

2 a d v a n c e s , t he Cha nc e l l or de mot e d he r , a nd s he br ought t hi s

a c t i o n a l l e gi ng s e xua l di s c r i mi na t i on i n e mpl oyme nt .

The Tr i a l Cour t de t e r mi ne d t ha t t he St a t e of

Te nn e s s e e wa s n ot p l a i nt i f f ’ s ?e mpl oye r ? f or t he pur pos e s of

THRA. Be f or e t he Tr i a l Cour t , p l a i nt i f f r e l i e d on Si bl e y

M mo r i al Hos pi t al v . W l s on, 488 F. 2d 1338 ( D. C. Ci r . 1973) , e i

a nd wh i l e t he Tr i a l J udg e r e i t e r a t e d t ha t Si bl e y he l d t ha t t he

Ac t r e a c he s be yond t he c ont e xt of di r e c t e mpl oyme nt , he

c o n c l u de d:

I n Hi l l v . Ne w Yor k Ci t y Boar d of Educ at i on, 808 F. Supp. 141 ( E. D. N. Y. 1992) t he pl a i nt i f f , a bl a c k ma l e , e mpl oye d by a n i nde pe nde nt c ont r a c t or a s a b u s dr i ve r wa s d e c e r t i f i e d by t he Boa r d, a nd l a t e r f i r e d by t he c ont r a c t or .

The Cour t ga v e s hor t s hr i f t t o hi s c l a i m t ha t he wa s a n e mpl oye e o f t he Boa r d, s a yi ng . . . ?t hi s a r gume nt i gno r e s t he f unda me nt a l pr e di c a t e of Ti t l e VI I l i a bi l i t y - t he e xi s t e nc e of a n e mpl oyme nt r e l a t i ons hi p be t we e n t he one who di s c r i mi na t e s a ga i ns t a not he r a nd t ha t ot he r who f i nds hi ms e l f t h e vi c t i m o f d i s c r i mi na t i on. ?

W t h d ue de f e r e nc e t o t he Tr i a l J udge , t he Hi l l Cour t ’ s i

h o l d i ng i s i n a c c or d wi t h Si bl e y , a nd e mpl oye d t he s o- c a l l e d

?e c on omi c r e a l i t i e s ? t e s t s e t f or t h i n Spr i t v . Te ac he r s

I n s u r a nc e and Annui t i e s As s oc i at i on, 691 F. 2d 1054 ( 2nd Ci r .

1 9 8 2 ) , va c a t e d 463 U. S. 1223 103 S. Ct . 3565, 77 L. Ed. 2d 140 6

( 1 9 8 3 ) , on r e ma nd 735 F. 2d 23, 2nd Ci r . Ce r t . de ni e d 469 U. S.

8 8 1 , 105 S. Ct . 247, 83 L. Ed. 185 ( 1984) , t o hol d:

?Unde r Spr i t , i t i s c l e a r t ha t t he Boa r d of Educ a t i on wa s a ‘ Ti t l e VI I e mpl oye r ’ i n t hi s c a s e . The Boa r d ha d t he e xc l us i ve powe r t o c e r t i f y pl a i nt i f f t o dr i ve on Boa r d of Educ a t i on r out e s , a nd, be c a us e Amboy di d bus i ne s s onl y wi t h t he Boa r d , s uc h c e r t i f i c a t i on powe r wa s t a t a mount t o a ‘ ve t o ’

a l l r e c o r d s o f j u v e n i l e a n d p r o b a t e c a s e s wh e r e wi t h i n t h e s p e c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e Co u n t y Co u r t . . . .

3 powe r by t he Boa r d ove r pl a i nt i f f ’ s e mpl oyme nt . ? I d. a t 148.

A c ompl a i nt wi l l be di s mi s s e d f or f a i l ur e t o s t a t e a

c l a i m upon whi c h r e l i e f ma y be gr a nt e d, onl y i f a f t e r t a ki n g

t he a l l e ga t i ons o f t he c ompl a i nt a s t r ue , t h e r e i s no s e t of

f a c t s unde r whi c h p l a i nt i f f woul d be e nt i t l e d t o r e l i e f .

Le wi s v . Al l e n, 698 S. W 2d 58 ( Te nn. 1985) ; T. R. A. P. 12. 02( 6 ) . .

Ou r r e vi e w of t he Tr i a l J udge ’ s a c t i on i n t hi s c a s e i s de n o v o

wi t h n o pr e s umpt i on of c or r e c t ne s s , s i nc e t he i s s ue i s a

q u e s t i on o f l a w. T. R. A. P. Rul e 13( d) .

THRA s t a t e s t ha t i t i s a di s c r i mi na t or y pr a c t i c e f o r

a n e mp l oye r t o:

( 1) Fa i l or r e f us e t o hi r e or di s c ha r ge a ny pe r s on or ot he r wi s e t o di s c r i mi na t e a ga i ns t a n i ndi vi dua l wi t h r e s pe c t t o c ompe ns a t i on, t e r ms , c ondi t i ons or pr i vi l e ge s of e mpl oyme nt be c a us e of s uc h i ndi vi dua l s ’ r a c e , c r e e d, c ol or , r e l i gi on, s e x, a g e or na t i ona l o r i gi n . . . . T. C. A. §4- 21- 401( 1) .

?Empl oye r ? i s de f i ne d a s i nc l udi ng ?t he s t a t e , o r a n y

p o l i t i c a l or c i vi l s ubdi vi s i on t he r e of , a nd pe r s ons e mpl oyi n g

e i g h t ( 8) or mor e pe r s ons wi t hi n t he s t a t e , or a ny pe r s on

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Sibley Memorial Hospital v. Verne Wilson
488 F.2d 1338 (D.C. Circuit, 1973)
Lynn Armbruster v. Terry Quinn
711 F.2d 1332 (Sixth Circuit, 1983)
Charlotte Lynn Rawlins YATES and Cheryl Jenkins Mathis, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. AVCO CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant
819 F.2d 630 (Sixth Circuit, 1987)
Debi Eyerman v. Mary Kay Cosmetics, Inc.
967 F.2d 213 (Sixth Circuit, 1992)
Tom PIERCE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and Capital Holding Corporation, Defendants-Appellees
40 F.3d 796 (Sixth Circuit, 1994)
Hill v. New York City Board of Education
808 F. Supp. 141 (E.D. New York, 1992)
Luther v. Z. Wilson, Inc.
528 F. Supp. 1166 (S.D. Ohio, 1981)
Lewis v. Allen
698 S.W.2d 58 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1985)
Bruce v. Western Auto Supply Co.
669 S.W.2d 95 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Sandy Sanders v. David W. Lanier, In his individual and in his offical capacities, and the State of Tennessee, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sandy-sanders-v-david-w-lanier-in-his-individual-a-tennctapp-2001.