A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld a motion to dismiss a Black legal assistant’s Title VII discrimination suit against a Florida law firm. The panel supported the lower court’s finding that a single offensive remark by an attorney who compared Marie Dorival to an enslaved person was insufficient to establish evidence of a hostile work environment. Although the panel characterized the remark as offensive, it noted that an “occasional off-color comment” does not constitute a hostile work environment.
Dorival claimed that a partner at the firm advised her that “Lincoln may have freed the slaves, but I’m keeping you.” After Dorival complained to management, she received an apology, relocation of her cubicle, and an assignment to another attorney. Nonetheless, Dorival claims that she continued to experience harassment through the actions of a managing attorney and co-workers.
In response, the law firm filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that, while inappropriate, the comment did not rise to the level of severe and pervasive harassment required to support a Title VII claim, and that her remaining allegations were vague. The lower court agreed and dismissed the case.
Dorival also argued on appeal that the lower court should have allowed her to amend her complaint. However, the Eleventh Circuit panel pointed out that allowing a plaintiff to amend a complaint wasn’t required when even an amendment would be insufficient to state a valid legal claim. Dorival’s lack of “specific details” concerning the claimed harassment led to the panel’s conclusion that she was unable to sustain a viable Title VII claim.
The case is Marie Dorival v. Cole Scott & Kissane et al., Case Number 25-11224, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]