# Constellium Rolled Products Ravenswood v. Sharon Griffith and Lou Ann Wall

> West Virginia Supreme Court · June 10, 2015 · 235 W. Va. 538

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9808085

## Case

- **Full name:** CONSTELLIUM ROLLED PRODUCTS RAVENSWOOD, LLC, and Melvin Lager, Defendants Below, Petitioners v. Sharon GRIFFITH and Lou Ann Wall, Plaintiffs Below, Respondents
- **Court:** West Virginia Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 10, 2015
- **Citations:** 235 W. Va. 538; 775 S.E.2d 90; 127 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 468; 2015 W. Va. LEXIS 726
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Ketchum
- **Judges:** Benjamin, Davis, Workman, Ketchum, Loughry
- **Nature of suit:** Tort, Contract, and Real Property
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9808085

## Opinion text

KETCHUM, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting’in part:
There was no viable cause of action for either compensatory damages or punitive damages. In order for a plaintiff to prevail on a claim for gender discrimination or sexual harassment it must be proven that the alleged wrongful conduct was based on the plaintiffs sex.' Hanlon v. Chambers, 195 W.Va. 99 , 464 S.E.2d 741 (1995). In this case, the defendant’s alleged wrongful conduct was directed both at men and women.
*1 All employees were encouraged to place comments in a suggestion box. The plant manager would attach his response to every comment. The comments and responses were posted on a plant bulletin board. When the comments and responses about the plaintiffs were posted, there were also posted approximately thirty nine other comments and responses. 1 There were postings that had derogatory comments- about both male and female employees, including a foreman.
*552 While it was ill advised to post derogatory-comments about any employee, these comments were not directed at only the female plaintiffs or female employees. They were equal opportunity postings directed at both men and women. Additionally, the comments about the plaintiffs were directed at their perceived work ethics.
There is no cause of action under our sex discrimination laws. Our anti-discrimination laws are not codes of civility. Our laws are aimed at discrimination directed at a protected class, not comments directed at anyone in the work place.
Therefore, I dissent.
I concur in the striking of the punitive damages only because there can be no punitive damages when there is no evidence supporting compensatory damages. The evidence in this case did not support a viable cause of action for compensatory damages, much less, punitive damages to punish the defendant. I do not accept the majority opinion’s legal reasoning in striking the punitive damages, but agree there can be no punitive damages awarded.
Syl. pt. 7, Alkire v. First Nat’l Bank of Parsons, 197 W.Va. 122 , 475 S.E.2d 122 (1996). Therefore, the first consideration is whether the conduct at issue herein is sufficient to expose Constellium to punitive damages for its actions toward Ms. Griffith and Ms. Wall.
. At the initial oral argument, it was not disputed that forty two comments- and responses were posted at the same time. Three of those comments were about the plaintiffs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9808085. Public record. Not legal advice.