THOMAS MICHAEL SMITH; MONALETO SNEED v. P.A.M. TRANSPORT, INC. - Articles

All Content

THOMAS MICHAEL SMITH; MONALETO SNEED v. P.A.M. TRANSPORT, INC.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Sep 25, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Douglas B. Janney, III, JANNEY LAW, Brentwood, Tennessee, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: Autumn L. Gentry, DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: Tara Patel, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Douglas B. Janney, III, JANNEY LAW, Brentwood, Tennessee, Stephen W. Grace, GRACE LAW, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Autumn L. Gentry, M. Reid Estes, Jr., DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

Attorneys 6: ON BRIEF: Tara Patel, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae.

Judge(s): COLE, STRANCH, and READLER, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville

JANE B. STRANCH, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs Thomas Michael Smith and Monaleto Sneed bring this action against their former employer, P.A.M. Transport, Inc. (“P.A.M. Transport”), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; 42 U.S.C. § 1981; and the Tennessee Human Rights Act (THRA). Plaintiffs assert that their supervisors at P.A.M. Transport created a racially hostile work environment. The district court granted summary judgment to P.A.M. Transport on the ground that Plaintiffs failed to adduce evidence of racial harassment sufficient to sustain a viable hostile work environment claim. For the reasons set forth below, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court.

Attachments: