Mazard-Saintilus v. Miami-Dade Cnty.

Mazard-Saintilus v. Miami-Dade Cnty.

Opinion

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

The matter before the Court is Defendants Miami-Dade County and Miami-Dade Economic Advocacy Trust's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint [ECF No. 4]. After reviewing the pleadings, the motion is GRANTED.

I. BACKGROUND¹

This case involves allegations of a hostile work environment, unconstitutional sex discrimination, and retaliation in a Miami-Dade County ("the County") workplace. Plaintiffs Carline Mazard-Saintilus and R.M. are former employees of the Miami-Dade Economic Advocacy Trust ("MDEAT"). (Compl. [ECF No. 1] at ¶¶ 15, 18). Mazard-Saintilus began working for MDEAT in January 2018 as a temporary employee and eventually earned a permanent position in April 2019. Id. at ¶¶ 15-17. R.M., a [*2]  minor, began working for MDEAT in June 2017 as a paid intern. Id. at ¶ 20. Both Mazard-Saintilus and R.M. were working for MDEAT in August 2019. Id.

On August 17, 2019, R.M., a high school senior, texted and shared her senior year pictures with her family members. Id. at ¶¶ 23-24. In the process, R.M. accidentally sent the pictures to MDEAT employee Rulah Bennett. Id. R.M. had Bennett's phone number from a previous work-related activity. Id. at ¶¶ 21-22. Bennett responded to R.M. by texting, "OMG! you are gorgeous. Damn (red heart emoji)." Id. at ¶ 25. Bennett continued, "I almost didn't know it was you. I was like [expletive] ... I need to hit this up (wink face emoji)." Id. Bennett then asked R.M. to call him. Id. at ¶ 26. R.M. did not immediately call Bennett back, but Bennett later called her twice that night. Id. R.M. conferenced one of her friends into the calls, and Bennett continued to compliment RM.'s physical appearance. Id. He also expressed a romantic interest in her. Id. That night, Bennett continued to text R.M. and told her that he "wished that she were there with him." Id. R.M. felt shocked, extremely uncomfortable, threatened, and humiliated by Bennett's conduct. Id. [*3]  at ¶¶ 25, 27.

On August 19, 2019, R.M. reported Bennett's conduct to two MDEAT employees. Id. at ¶ 28. One of the employees was Mazard-Saintilus. Id. Because RM.'s supervisor was not at work that day, and because R.M. feared Bennett, Mazard-Saintilus reported the incident to MDEAT's Department Personnel Representative ("DPR"). Id. at ¶ 29. DPR followed up the report by requesting Mazard-Saintilus to provide a written statement regarding the incident and by interviewing Mazard-Saintilus and R.M. Id. at ¶¶ 30-31.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.