Miss. Dep't of Employment Sec. v. Trent L. Howell, PLLC
| Docket Number: | 2009-CC-01203-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-19-2010 Opinion Author: Griffis, J. Holding: Reversed and rendered. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Unemployment benefits - Good cause - Offensive work environment - Section 71-5-513 Judge(s) Concurring: Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Dissenting Author : Irving, J., dissents with separate written opinion Dissent Joined By : joined in part by Ishee, J. Dissenting Author : Ishee, J., dissents with separate written opinion Dissent Joined By : King, C.J. Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Barnes, J., concurs in part and in the result without separate written opinion. Procedural History: Bench Trial; Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-23-2009 Appealed from: YALOBUSHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Andrew C. Baker Disposition: REVERSED BOARD OF REVIEW’S DECISION TO AWARD UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TO TINA L. DARBY Case Number: CV2008-53BY2 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Mississippi Department of Employment Security |
LEANNE FRANKLIN BRADY |
|
|
| Appellee: | Trent L. Howell, PLLC | TRENT L. HOWELL | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Unemployment benefits - Good cause - Offensive work environment - Section 71-5-513 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Trent L. Howell, PLLC is a law office located in Water Valley. Trent Howell and his wife, Shelley, work at the firm. Tina Darby first began working as a legal assistant for the firm when she was eighteen years old, and she stayed with the firm until she was twenty-nine years old. Over time, an “office flirtation” developed between Trent and Darby. In fact, Trent wrote Darby a letter expressing his feelings toward her. Offended by Trent’s letter, Darby was ready and willing to quit her job, but after meeting with Trent and his wife and receiving an apology from Trent, Darby decided to stay. Following the meeting between the Howells and Darby, three occurrences took place that Darby claimed to be harassment: a phone call to her dentist, an uninvited visit to Darby’s house, and a phone call to her beautician. She claims these occurrences ultimately forced her to quit her job. Each of these occurrences took place within two months of the reconciliation meeting between the parties. After voluntarily leaving her position at the firm, Darby filed for unemployment benefits. The claims examiner recommended disqualification of unemployment benefits because Darby had failed to show good cause for voluntarily leaving her employment. Darby appealed the decision of the claims examiner and was denied benefits once again. Darby filed an appeal to the Board of Review. The Board of Review agreed with and adopted the administrative judge’s findings of fact; however, the Board of Review also made additional findings that allowed Darby to qualify for benefits. The Board of Review found that Trent’s conduct following the reconciliation meeting between the parties constituted a form of harassment which created an offensive work environment. Thus, the Board of Review was of the opinion that Darby had good cause for quitting her employment. The firm appealed to circuit court which reversed the decision of the Board of Review. The Mississippi Department of Employment Security and Darby appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | MDES and Darby first argue that the circuit court erred when it found the Board of Review’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence. The Board of Review was solely responsible for evaluating the credibility of the testimony and the supporting documentation. Because the Board of Review based its findings on the evidentiary record, the circuit court was outside its scope of authority when it reweighed the evidence of the case. The Board of Review made several factual findings. First, Trent wanted a personal relationship with Darby. Second, Trent wanted a sexual relationship with Darby. Third, Trent interfered with Darby’s personal life and affairs by (a) telling her not to marry her fiancé, (b) questioning her whereabouts during her personal time, and (c) meddling in Darby’s personal affairs or appointments. The Board of Review found Trent’s love letter to Darby was substantial evidence for her claim. Trent’s self-authored letter supported the following conduct: he propositioned Darby for sex; he propositioned Darby for a romantic relationship; he questioned Darby’s whereabouts and activities that were not work related; and he admitted that he knew his feelings for Darby were his personal problem. The record contains substantial evidence to support the Board of Review’s finding. Sexual harassment in the workplace is a valid reason for an employee to voluntarily terminate his or her employment under the statutory guidelines of section 71-5-513 (A)(3)(a). Darby proved by substantial evidence that she had good cause to leave her employment with the firm due to harassment, under section 71-5-513(A)(1)(c). The circuit court’s reversal of the Board of Review’s decision overlooked the substantial evidence in the record that Trent’s sexual harassment of Darby constituted an offensive work environment and fails to apply the correct standard to determine whether the harassment encountered was to such a degree that it qualified as valid cause to voluntarily terminate her employment. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
