## Facts

- Nathaniel Henderson, a Black man, worked as a concrete truck driver at a plant where he was the only Black employee.
- Two white co-workers, Mitchell Santerre and Reed Moistner, allegedly subjected Henderson to repeated racial slurs and racist jokes, sometimes multiple times per month.
- Henderson presented evidence of KKK-related intimidation, including insinuations that Moistner was affiliated with the KKK and threats tied to that association.
- Henderson alleged escalating harassment and threats, including cut buttons on his work shirts, grease placed in his truck, and dead mice left inside his truck.
- Henderson also alleged overt physical threats, including an invitation to fight and two attempts by Santerre to run him over in the parking lot.
- Henderson complained to his supervisor, who was allegedly present for many incidents and allegedly acknowledged Moistner’s KKK affiliation.
- After Henderson’s complaints, management took limited steps (including a general sign about rodents) and, after a written complaint to the general manager, issued warnings that were later rescinded with an apology and a statement that the complaints could not be substantiated.
- After internal complaints, the two co-workers filed a small-claims action against Henderson; Henderson alleged a racial slur was used against him at the courthouse.

## Issues

1. Whether the alleged conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a racially hostile work environment under Title VII.
2. Whether the employer could be liable for co-worker harassment based on notice and the adequacy of corrective action.
3. Whether Henderson produced evidence of an actionable retaliation claim under Title VII.
4. Whether individual co-workers could be personally liable under Title VII.
5. Whether the evidence supported Henderson’s Indiana state-law tort claims.

## Decision

- Summary judgment was denied on the Title VII hostile work environment claim against the employer.
- Summary judgment was granted on the Title VII claims against the individual co-workers.
- Summary judgment was granted on the Title VII retaliation claim.
- Summary judgment was granted on the state-law claims.

## Legal Principles

- A Title VII hostile work environment requires conduct that is severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive environment, evaluated under both subjective and objective standards.
- An employer may be liable for co-worker harassment if it knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action reasonably calculated to stop it.
- A Title VII retaliation claim requires proof of protected activity, a materially adverse action, and a causal connection between the two.
- Individual employees are not personally liable under Title VII.
- Indiana tort claims such as intentional infliction of emotional distress require proof of elements that are not satisfied by every instance of workplace mistreatment; insufficient evidentiary support warrants summary judgment.

## Conclusion

The court allowed the Title VII hostile work environment claim against the employer to proceed because a jury could find severe or pervasive race-based harassment and an inadequate employer response after notice, while disposing of the retaliation, state-law, and individual-liability claims at summary judgment.


Henderson v. Irving Materials, Inc., 329 F. Supp. 2d 1002 (S.D. Ind. 2004)