Former officer drops lawsuit that alleged hostile workplace, sexual rumors

Note: This story was updated at 3:51 a.m. Feb. 21.

A former Oak Ridge police officer who had alleged she was the subject of sexual rumors that had created a hostile work environment has withdrawn a $1.25 million federal lawsuit against the city.

Former Oak Ridge Police Department Officer Christina Targonski had alleged that another officer had spread sexual rumors about her—allegedly telling other officers that she had invited him to an orgy and was distributing nude photos of herself to “whoever wanted them,” federal court records said.

She said she had been called a lesbian, accused of inappropriate conduct, and received harassing phone calls. Co-workers would not back her up on high-priority calls and were told not to hang out with her, and she was essentially compelled to resign in September 2010 after two years as an officer, Targonski said.

But on Feb. 8, five days before a Feb. 13 trial was scheduled to start, Targonski withdrew the lawsuit.

The voluntary withdrawal is known as a stipulation of dismissal. It gave no reason for the withdrawal, and Knoxville attorney Michael S. Shipwash, who has represented Targonski, did not return a phone call seeking comment Monday afternoon.

Shipwash also was not available for comment or to provide contact information for Targonski on Wednesday afternoon.

The withdrawal was filed “without prejudice,” meaning Targonski can re-file the lawsuit within a year. It said there was no settlement, admission of liability, or damage award between the former officer and the city, which has denied many of Targonski’s allegations.

The lawsuit—which alleged sexual harassment, retaliation, intimidation, and gender discrimination—had been filed in U.S. District Court in Knoxville on June 2011.

U.S. District Judge Leon Jordan had earlier agreed to allow only one of Targonski’s dozen claims to go to trial. The 12 counts had included hostile work environment, retaliation, disparate treatment, harassment, constructive discharge, extreme and outrageous conduct, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent hiring, negligent supervision, negligent training, and gross negligence. The court dismissed 10 of those claims, and said an 11th claim, that of harassment, was simply a component of other claims, as opposed to a free-standing cause of action.

“Notwithstanding the 12 counts presented in this case, plaintiff’s complaint and briefing have brought to the court only (if anything) a hostile work environment claim,” Jordan wrote in an opinion filed July 18, 2012. “That claim will be allowed to proceed to trial.”

In a summary of the case, Jordan said Targonski, who was hired by Oak Ridge in 2008, had complained to her supervisor in late 2009 that Officer John Thomas was spreading sexual rumors about her. She claimed that Thomas told her that her husband was trying to get Thomas to have an orgy involving Thomas’ then-girlfriend, and “he felt like I was a lesbian and I wanted to be part of it,” according to Jordan’s summary.

But in its filings, the city said Thomas, who was apparently displeased, was actually accusing Targonski’s husband of trying to get Thomas and his then-girlfriend to participate with Targonski and her husband in apparent sexual activity.

After an investigation, ORPD Capt. Mike Uher concluded that the matter was a personal issue of dislike between Targonski and Thomas. Each had asked to be removed from their shift, and at the request of Targonski, Thomas was moved to another shift.

Targonski alleged the rumors continued, although the city said she had only had one verbal encounter with Thomas. Other than than, Targonski was complaining of rumors from Thomas she heard “through the grapevine,” the city said in a May 29, 2012, memo.

Targonski alleged that she had complained to at least three supervisors, but the city refused to do anything, retaliating against her instead. She said other ORPD employees had also made harassing comments toward her or about her. She said she was severely humiliated, embarrassed, and harmed emotionally, and reassigned to menial or degrading work.

But Jordan said many of the comments were hearsay, inadmissible, and irrelevant. However, he did admit remarks from several employees that, cumulatively, he said, showed rumor- and gender-based sexual harassment.

It was a case in which Targonski’s own Facebook posts were used to undermine her testimony.

She had testified that the thought of an orgy at her house, while her son was at home, was “severely humiliating” to her, Jordan wrote in his July 2012 opinion. But the judge said Targonski had discussed, on Facebook, a desire to have a female friend join her “naked in the hot tub” and naked Twister.

The city and its attorney, Benjamin K. Lauderback of Knoxville, also cited the former officer’s Facebook posts. The city argued that Targonski, while claiming to feel harassed and embarrassed by the alleged rumors in the Police Department, had herself been engaged in Facebook conversations with her husband and friends that made reference to sexually-related content of the same type she alleged Thomas was saying about her.

“It is very important to note that while the plaintiff apparently felt harassed by comments she attributes to Thomas, she did not feel embarrassed or harassed by comments made by the plaintiff’s friends, husband, or even herself on her Facebook account about subject matters that are clearly sexual in nature,” the city said in the May 2012 memo. “The plaintiff’s and her friends’ discussions were open to at least 166 ‘friends,’ including, but not limited to, other police officers who had access to that Facebook account. The discussions and communications took place during the same timeframe she alleges she was harassed by Thomas.”

Targonski testified that the Facebook postings were “obviously” jokes, and were not embarrassing or humiliating because they were between friends.

While still an Oak Ridge officer, Targonski requested administrative leave or reassignment, and she was placed on light duty in June 2010, federal court records said. But her first assignment was to clean out a supply closet, which she found to be “kind of degrading.” She was reassigned again the next month to the Administrative Sergeant’s Office and, in September 2010, allegedly accused of taking excessive breaks. She resigned the same day.

“I have been mocked, ridiculed, disciplined, and forced to endure a hostile work environment,” Targonski wrote in a resignation letter to former Oak Ridge Police Chief David Beams. “It is apparent that this treatment of me will not stop until I am no longer with this department.”

Oak Ridge said Targonski was never demoted, terminated, or transferred except by her own request, and she never had her pay decreased—”that is, she never suffered from an adverse employment action.”

By her own admission, the city said, Targonski was “unable to perform the simplest tasks of a police officer.”

The city also said it had granted every reasonable on-the-job request made by Targonski, such as to go to light duty and off of her normal patrol duties, and she resigned on her own.

“In short, this defendant submits that, because of a lack of evidence, the plaintiff cannot prove she was discriminated against because of her gender, sexually harassed, retaliated against, subjected to a hostile work environment, or constructively discharged as a matter of law,” the city said in a May 2012 motion. “Therefore, her claims should be dismissed via a granting of this defendant’s motion for summary judgement.”

Targonski filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in April 2010, alleging gender discrimination and retaliation. But about a year later, before she filed the federal lawsuit, the EEOC said it was unable to conclude, based upon its investigation, that federal statutes had been violated.

In a Feb. 16, 2011, letter to Targonski, federal investigator Stephen Liston said she failed to make an internal complaint that complied with ORPD harassment policies and “failed to identify the specifics of the ‘vicious and untrue’ rumors in order to establish whether the rumors would rise to the level of harassment instead of being insulting or inappropriate.”

Liston also said Targonski had failed to establish any tangible employment harm.

“You were not disciplined, demoted, or otherwise subjected to adverse treatment because of your complaint that a coworker was spreading rumors about you,” he said. He said cell phone records showed the anonymous, harassing phone calls came from a friend of Targonski’s, and not a city employee.

City officials declined to comment on the lawsuit’s withdrawal this month.