Detrimentally Underdone – U.S. District Court Dismisses Chef’s Title VII Employment Discrimination Claim Against Sorority

Haellie Gordon, Fraternal Law Partners, hgordon@manleyburke.com 

In April 2023, Bernadine Williams, a chef for College Fresh, Inc. (“College Fresh”) that worked with Delta Zeta Sorority’s (“Delta Zeta”) local chapter at Louisiana State University (the “Sigma Chapter”) (collectively with Delta Zeta, the “Fraternal Defendants”), filed Title VII employment discrimination and Section 1983 claims against several defendants. Fraternal Law Partners previously reported on this case following the filing of Williams’ initial complaint.^[1]In March 2024, nearly a year later, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana issued two separate decisions dismissing Williams’ claims against all defendants.^[2]

Most notably, the Court dismissed Williams’ Title VII employment discrimination claim against the Fraternal Defendants. It held Williams could not succeed because she failed to sufficiently allege that the Fraternal Defendants were her Title VII “employers.”^[3] While Williams claimed the Fraternal Defendants and College Fresh were her “joint employers,” the federal circuit in which the case was filed required a showing of “sufficient control” over the employee for a defendant to qualify as an employer.^[4] The Court therefore applied a “hybrid economic realities/common law” test consisting of a number of factors.

Under that test, courts consider whether a particular entity has the right to control the employee’s conduct. Relevant factors include the right to hire and fire, the right to supervise, and the right to set the employee’s work schedule,^[5] Further, courts take note of who paid the employee’s salary, withheld taxes, provided benefits, and set the terms and conditions of employment.^[6]

In her Complaint, Williams alleged that College Fresh made changes to her work assignments and was responsible for placing her with the Sigma Chapter.^[7] Williams failed, however, to allege any facts supporting her contention that the Fraternal Defendants exercised the right to control her as an employee. Further, Williams failed to allege the Fraternal Defendants paid her salary, withheld taxes, or provided any benefits. Based on the foregoing findings, the Court held Williams failed to plausibly allege the required elements to establish that the Fraternal Defendants were her joint employers, and therefore dismissed her Title VII employment discrimination claim.

The Court also dismissed Williams’ remaining claims against the Fraternal Defendants and College Fresh. Regarding Williams’ Section 1983 claims against the Fraternal Defendants and College Fresh, the Court found that Williams did not allege any facts supporting her assertion that the Fraternal Defendants and College Fresh are state actors, as required to bring a claim under Section 1983.^[8] Dismissal of Williams’ Section 1983 claims against all defendants was therefore warranted.

The Court also separately dismissed Williams’ final claim against College Fresh for Title VII employment discrimination due to Williams’ untimely filing.^[9] Since the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued Williams’ right-to-sue letter on January 3, 2023, the Court held that the 90-day period to file Williams’ Title VII claim ended on April 3, 2023, eight (8) days prior to when Williams actually filed her Complaint in court.^[10]

The Court’s ruling in this matter emphasizes the importance of control over an individual when determining whether a particular organization is an employer with respect to Title VII employment discrimination claims. While an individual may regularly provide services to an entity, these contacts may be insufficient to establish that the entity is the individual’s employer without a successful showing of the additional factors.

[1] Hanna Puthoff, Chef Serves Up Lawsuit for Racial Discrimination in the Sorority House, 181 Fraternal L. 9 (June 2023).

[2] Williams v. Delta Zeta Sorority, No. 23-268-JWD-RLB, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53583 (M.D. La. Mar. 26, 2024) (hereinafter “Fraternal Defs. Decision”); Williams v. Delta Zeta Sorority, No. 23-268-JWD-RLB, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54852 (M.D. La. Mar. 27, 2024) (hereinafter “College Fresh Decision”).

[3] Fraternal Defs. Decision, at *10.

[4] Id. at *12.

[5] Id.

[6] Id.

[7] Id. at *13.  

[8] Id. at *8–9; College Fresh Decision, at *11.

[9] College Fresh Decision, at *15-16.

[10] Id.