Title VII's prohibition against employer retaliation extends to employee's unreasonable deposition testimony

Law Reporter, Aug 1999

Glover v. South Carolina Law Enforcement Div., 170 F.3d 411 (4th Cir. 1999).

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held an employer cannot fire an employee for providing deposition testimony in a Title VII case, even if that testimony is unreasonable.

Here, Glover was a police captain with the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED). During her deposition in a gender discrimination case against her former employer, Glover made derogatory comments about her successor. She was then terminated from SLED, in part because of her deposition testimony.

Glover sued SLED, alleging retaliatory discharge in violation of section 704(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. (sec)2000e-3(a). That section prohibits retaliation against an employee for testifying in a deposition in a Title VII case. The trial court granted defendant summary judgment, holding plaintiff's conduct was not protected from retaliation because she testified unreasonably in her deposition.

Reversing, the Fourth Circuit noted that the plain language of section 704(a) does not include a reasonableness requirement. According to the statute's unrestrictive language, all testimony in a Title VII proceeding is protected against punitive employer action, the court said. Further, the court found, this conclusion is consistent with section 704(a)'s purpose of ensuring that investigators have unfettered access to the testimony of witnesses. If a witness in a Title VII proceeding were secure from retaliation only when her testimony met some slippery reasonableness standard, the court reasoned, she would surely be less than forthcoming. Thus, the application of section 704(a) should not turn on the substance of the testimony.

Accordingly, the court remanded.

Plaintiff's Counsel:

*Marilyn Lynette Hudson, Knoxville, Tenn.

A. James Andrews, Knoxville, Tenn.