Lawanda Jones v. Education Affiliates, Inc., No. 18-20051 (5th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 18-20051 Document: 00514583391 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/02/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-20051 Summary Calendar FILED August 2, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk LAWANDA BEASLEY JONES, Plaintiff−Appellant, versus EDUCATION AFFILIATES, INCORPORATED, Defendant−Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 4:16-CV-1829 Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Former employee Lawanda Jones claimed that Education Affiliates, Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 18-20051 Document: 00514583391 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/02/2018 No. 18-20051 Incorporated, terminated her in violation of the anti-retaliation provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Jones claims that two fellow employees told her they felt they were being discriminated against. The company had an internal investigation during which Jones was interviewed. She claims that after reporting the conversations with the two employees, she started receiving negative treatment at work. Jones was terminated, allegedly for making divisive and racial comments on the job. She filed an EEOC complaint asserting that she was fired for being a witness in an internal discrimination investigation. Eventually she sued in state court, and the case was removed. The district court granted summary judgment for the employer. The court concluded that Jones had not engaged in protected activity because “[a]ll of Jones’ purported ‘protected activity’ was either her responsibility, as part of her job duties, or nothing more than uncorroborated allegations.” The court added that the case should not advance beyond the summary judgment stage because “Jones has failed to present precise evidence in the record and articulate the exact manner in which that evidence supports her claims.” We have reviewed the briefs, pertinent parts of the record, and the applicable law. We agree with the reasoning in the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered December 21, 2017. The summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons given by the district court. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
