Loudermilk

I. BACKGROUND

In her third amended complaint and in prior versions pertinent to this appeal, Loudermilk alleged the following material facts: Loudermilk is employed by the County as a juvenile institutional officer for the Department. Her duties include providing security, supervision, educational programs, and recreational activities for minors in the custody of juvenile hall. Before the events giving rise to this action, Loudermilk received positive reviews during her employment and her work performance had never been criticized. In the summer of 2008, Loudermilk developed an idea for a program in which outside guests would come to juvenile hall to speak with the minors about their experiences, and the presentations would be videotaped for viewing by detainees. Loudermilk presented the idea to one of her supervisors, Ms. Walters, who liked the idea and encouraged Loudermilk to develop the program. When defendant Lowe-Copeland, who was also a supervisor of Loudermilk, found out Loudermilk was working with Walters on the project, she became enraged, and angrily challenged Loudermilk about why she chose to work with Walters rather than Lowe-Copeland. Lowe-Copeland called…