Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Jeanne Harrison v. Eddy Potash, Inc.

Date: 05-01-2001

Case Number: 00-2221

Judge: Broscoe

Court: United States Court of Appealls for the Tenth Circuit

Plaintiff's Attorney: Floyd D. Wilson and Katherine A. Basham of McCary, Wilson & Pryor, Albuquerque, New Mexico

Defendant's Attorney: W. T. Martin Jr., Martin Law Office, Carlsbad, New Meixco and Stephen S. Shanor of Martin, Browne, Hull & Harper, PLL, Springfield, Ohio

Description:
Plaintiff is a resident of Carlsbad, New Mexico. Defendant Eddy Potash, Inc., is a New Mexico corporation doing business in Eddy County, New Mexico. Defendant Robert L. Brown is a supervisor employed by Potash. Plaintiff began working for Potash as an underground potash miner in May 1992 and was the only female working with a crew of approximately 30 men [and was one of only two women miners in the entire operation]. Brown, who worked as the underground shift foreman, was plaintiff''s supervisor and was in charge of delegating duties and assigning work to plaintiff. According to plaintiff, Brown was the first person she was required to call if she was sick or wanted to take vacation. Brown was also involved in the disciplinary process.


The miners at Potash had a "buddy system" where each miner was assigned a "buddy" and each set of "buddies" worked together in a section of the mine away from other members of his or her crew. If a miner was not assigned a "buddy" on a particular shift, he or she was designated the "extra person" and was typically assigned to perform miscellaneous duties.


On May 4, 1993, Brown approached plaintiff in an isolated portion of the mine and attempted to kiss her on the mouth. She "pushed him away and told him he was crazy and to get the hell out of there." On the following day, Brown ordered plaintiff to leave her work station and accompany him to an abandoned unlit section of the mine to look for empty oil barrels he had allegedly previously noticed. After driving around the mine for awhile, Brown stopped the vehicle and walked around to the side where plaintiff was sitting. He tried to kiss plaintiff, to put his hands on her breasts and between her legs, and to unzip her pants. At the same time, Brown made various sexually suggestive comments to plaintiff, including asking her if she wanted to have intercourse or oral sex. Plaintiff pushed Brown away and said "No" to each question. Brown "unbuttoned his pants and exposed his penis, put [plaintiff's] hand on his penis, and he ejaculated." Brown then drove plaintiff back to the section of the mine where she normally worked.


On May 15, 1993, plaintiff was working with her "buddy" to fix a broken machine. Brown arrived where they were working and ordered plaintiff to accompany him to the shop to look for a part for the machine. Before arriving at the shop, Brown stopped the vehicle in an unoccupied section of the mine, walked around to plaintiff's side of the vehicle, and again attempted to kiss her, to touch her, and to unzip her pants. Plaintiff repeatedly told Brown "No." Brown started walking back to his side of the vehicle, but turned around and returned to where plaintiff was sitting. He unzipped his pants and said, "'Well, at least I can be happy.'" He then forced plaintiff to masturbate him. Brown then drove plaintiff to the shop and ordered the mechanic to drive her back to where she had been working.


On May 24, 1993, plaintiff was working a "graveyard" shift and was designated as the "extra person." Brown ordered her to accompany him to a section of the mine where they were experiencing a high methane gas reading, stating they needed to check the readings and make sure the section had been curtained off correctly. After they completed the work described, Brown drove to a nearby section of the mine that was unoccupied, unlit, and had a low ceiling. As in the previous incidents, Brown walked around to plaintiff's side of the vehicle and attempted to kiss her, touch her, and unzip her pants. He also made various sexually suggestive comments. Plaintiff again told him "No" and attempted to push him away. Ultimately, Brown exposed himself and forced plaintiff to masturbate him.


On June 7, 1993, Brown ordered plaintiff to clean up around the shifter's office. After she had finished, Brown ordered her to accompany him in taking a load of materials to a section of the mine. On the way, Brown stopped the vehicle at an old unoccupied section of the mine and told plaintiff, "Look, I made us a bed out of [burlap] cloth." Brown asked plaintiff to lie down with him and she did. Brown repeatedly asked her to have sex with him and attempted to kiss and touch her, but plaintiff said "No." Brown then forced plaintiff to masturbate him.


During the period of time in which the incidents took place, plaintiff was aware of rumors indicating Brown was going to replace Larry Robertson, who was retiring in the safety office. The safety office was located on the surface and plaintiff believed if Brown went to that position she would not be in contact with him or under his supervision. However, when plaintiff returned to work on June 21, 1993, after a three-day break, she learned Brown would not be replacing Robertson. At that point, she knew the "problem wasn't going to go away," and she "was going to have to do something to put an end to it." However, she was scared that no one in management would believe her and that she would lose her job.


On June 26, 1993, plaintiff arrived at work and learned her usual "buddy" had been assigned to work with another miner and she was the "extra person." Afraid Brown would again attempt to harass her, she completed a few of her assigned tasks and told Brown she was sick and was going home.


On June 27, 1993, plaintiff was again designated the "extra person." Brown ordered her to accompany him to shovel some tunnels in the mine. When they arrived, Brown again began harassing her in the identical manner as in the previous incidents. Plaintiff refused his advances and refused to masturbate him. Brown drove plaintiff back to his office and told her to go to her machine and work through lunch. Later that same day, Brown ordered plaintiff to help him clean his office. When they were alone, he again began harassing plaintiff, touching her, and repeatedly asking her to have sex. Plaintiff refused Brown's advances.


* * *
Although plaintiff remained on the Potash payroll for approximately one year, she never returned to work. On June 17, 1994, her employment was terminated due to a reduction in force at the mine. Harrison filed suit against EPI and Brown alleging hostile work environment sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and violations of New Mexico tort law.


A jury returned a verdict in favor of Harrison and against Brown on her state law claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and battery, and awarded her compensatory damages of $102,500 and punitive damages of $40,000. The jury found against Harrison, however, with respect to her Title VII claim against EPI.

Outcome:
Defendant Eddy Potash, Inc., (EPI) appealed from the district court's entry of partial summary judgment, as well as the district court's final judgment after trial, in favor of plaintiff Jeanne Harrison on her claim of Title VII sexual harassment. Affirmed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Unknown
Defendant's Experts:
Unknown
Comments:
E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to info@morelaw.com.

About This Case

What was the outcome of Jeanne Harrison v. Eddy Potash, Inc.?

The outcome was: Defendant Eddy Potash, Inc., (EPI) appealed from the district court's entry of partial summary judgment, as well as the district court's final judgment after trial, in favor of plaintiff Jeanne Harrison on her claim of Title VII sexual harassment. Affirmed.

Which court heard Jeanne Harrison v. Eddy Potash, Inc.?

This case was heard in United States Court of Appealls for the Tenth Circuit, NM. The presiding judge was Broscoe.

Who were the attorneys in Jeanne Harrison v. Eddy Potash, Inc.?

Plaintiff's attorney: Floyd D. Wilson and Katherine A. Basham of McCary, Wilson & Pryor, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Defendant's attorney: W. T. Martin Jr., Martin Law Office, Carlsbad, New Meixco and Stephen S. Shanor of Martin, Browne, Hull & Harper, PLL, Springfield, Ohio.

When was Jeanne Harrison v. Eddy Potash, Inc. decided?

This case was decided on May 1, 2001.