Houston firefighter can pursue sexual harassment lawsuit, federal appeals court rules

In a precedent-setting decision, a federal appeals court has decided a former Houston firefighter can take her claim to trial — a case that started when she learned two colleagues had for years, and without her knowledge, been watching an intimate video intended for her husband, according to court documents. The ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recognized that someone can be sexually harassed behind their back, which former firefighter Melinda Abbt said happened when she sued the city of Houston. The opinion partially reverses a decision by U.S. District Judge Lynn N. Hughes, who dismissed her claim on his contention that she was unable to prove a hostile work environment. The claim contends Houston Fire Department firefighter Chris Barrientes obtained in 2008 a nude video that had been on her personal laptop, while the two worked at Station 18 in the East End. He then shared it with District Chief David Elliott, who has since retired. Both repeatedly watched the video, according to court records.

The initial lawsuit states Abbt was unaware of their access to the video until 2017 and that she had no idea how many others may have watched the footage. A third firefighter, Jonathan Sciortino, testified that he was in the room when Barrientes showed the video to Elliott, according to federal records. Circuit Judge James C. Ho described the allegations as disturbing and rebuked Hughes’ court. “The district court should have treated this misconduct as unlawful as well as disgraceful,” Ho said, adding that city officials conceded that the firefighters’ alleged conduct was “morally reprehensible.” “At least two of her male superiors at the Houston Fire Department — Chris Barrientes and David Elliott — and perhaps countless others treated her as nothing more than a sexual object,” Ho concluded in the 19-page opinion. “They accessed a private, intimate, nude video that Abbt had obviously made exclusively for her husband. They did so without her knowledge or permission. And they watched it repeatedly, both on and off-duty, alone and in front of co-workers, for over nine years.” The opinion makes note of the district court judge’s words when he dismissed her claim.