Covington & Burling Defeats Suit by Guard Who Scuffled With Boss

A black former security officer with Covington & Burling LLP lacks proof he was fired in retaliation for complaining about race discrimination, not for a physical altercation with his boss, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled.

Carlos Harley started with the law firm in Washington in May 2017. He complained to human resources in December 2017 that supervisor Derek New, who is white, harassed, intimidated, and threatened to fire him because of his race. He was fired following a physical confrontation with New in March 2018 in Covington’s parking garage, after New said he heard Harley was spreading rumors New was a racist, the court said May 15.

The altercation occurred 10 days after another manager told Harley that several co-workers had reported he was going around the building accusing New of being a racist, the court said.

Covington fired both men following an investigation.

Harley said New cussed and called him a liar. The supervisor also threw a punch at him and grabbed him around the neck, causing him physical injuries, Harley said.

To prove retaliation under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, he would have to show his termination was caused by his prior bias complaints about New. But Harley’s lawsuit didn’t allege facts supporting such a connection, Judge Reggie B. Walton said.

More than three months had passed between his bias complaint and his discharge, so Harley couldn’t establish the causal nexus needed to prove job retaliation by pointing to the timing alone, Walton said. Moreover, the reason for his firing “had nothing to do with his protected activity and everything to do with his altercation in the parking garage,” the judge said.

New’s termination for the same altercation further undercut Harley’s Title VII claim, the court said. He needed proof retaliation was the “but-for” cause of his termination, not just one of Covington’s motives, it said.

Harley also failed to state a claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy, the judge said. He didn’t rebut the presumption that the firm could fire him at will under D.C. law or identify a public policy that his termination may have violated, Walton said.

Harley of District Heights, Md., represented himself. Lorenger & Carnell PLC represented Covington & Burling.

The case is Harley v. Covington & Burling, 2020 BL 182783, D.D.C., No. 1:18-cv-02633, 5/15/20.