Camalyn Turner Lawsuit Against Memphis-Shelby County Schools, Former Superintendent Marie Feagins Accused of Sexual Harassment and Retaliation in Title VII Case

On October 29, 2026, former Memphis-Shelby County Schools (MSCS) employee Camalyn S. Turner filed a federal employment discrimination lawsuit against the Shelby County Board of Education, which does business as MSCS. She alleges that former Superintendent Dr. Marie N. Feagins sexually harassed her in two incidents in 2024 and then retaliated against her, creating a hostile work environment that forced her to resign.

The case is Turner v. Shelby County Board of Education d/b/a Memphis-Shelby County Schools, No. 2:26-cv-03456, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Western Division. Turner demands a jury trial and brings her claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Some coverage reports a damages demand of about $1.5 million in compensatory damages.

Marie Feagins is not personally named as a defendant. Turner sued the school board, her former employer. The school district has acknowledged the filing and declined to comment on pending litigation. No court has decided whether Turner’s allegations are true.

Turner v. Shelby County Board of Education: Quick Facts

Case detail	Information
Plaintiff	Camalyn S. Turner, former Special Assistant to the Superintendent
Defendant	Shelby County Board of Education d/b/a Memphis-Shelby County Schools
Person accused in the complaint	Dr. Marie N. Feagins, former MSCS superintendent (not a named defendant)
Case number	2:26-cv-03456
Court	U.S. District Court, Western District of Tennessee, Western Division (Memphis)
Filing date	October 29, 2026
Plaintiff’s attorney	Murray B. Wells, Wells & Associates, PLLC
Main federal law	Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.
Claims	Sexual harassment (hostile work environment and tangible employment action), retaliation, constructive discharge
First alleged incident	August 19, 2024
Second alleged incident	October 4, 2024
Resignation	Around October 15, 2024 (sources vary slightly on the effective date)
EEOC charge number	490-2025-03551
EEOC notice of right to sue	Dated August 6, 2026
Relief sought	Back pay, front pay or compensation in lieu of reinstatement, benefits, compensatory damages (about $1.5 million reported), other relief
Jury trial	Demanded
Class action	No
Settlement / claim form	None
Current status	Earliest stage. No answer, hearing date or ruling reported.

Who Is Camalyn Turner and What Was Her Role at Memphis-Shelby County Schools?

Turner is a licensed attorney and education administrator. MSCS announced on June 11, 2024 that Feagins had selected her as special assistant to the superintendent. According to the complaint, she started around June 17, 2024 after volunteering earlier that month, and she moved to Memphis for the job.

The complaint describes a portfolio that worked much like a chief of staff, including support for the superintendent’s calendar, grievances, policy, safety and communications, and oversight of senior leaders. Before MSCS she held roles in Atlanta Public Schools and Birmingham City Schools. The district’s October 2024 organizational chart lists her in the superintendent’s office.

Sources: MSCS appointment announcement and October 2024 organizational chart.

Who Is Dr. Marie Feagins and Why Was She Fired by the Shelby County Board of Education?

Feagins became MSCS superintendent in spring 2024. The board terminated her contract for cause on January 21, 2025, after roughly nine to ten months, citing contract violations. She has filed her own lawsuits against the board alleging sex discrimination, retaliation and Open Meetings Act violations, which remain pending separately. Turner’s complaint says Feagins was her direct supervisor with full authority over her employment terms.

What Does the Turner Lawsuit Allege? Timeline From the Complaint

All of the following are allegations from the complaint as reported. None has been proven.

June 2024: Turner joins the superintendent’s office

Feagins selected Turner as special assistant. In August 2024, with her own housing not yet ready, Turner temporarily stayed as a guest at Feagins’ residence.

August 19, 2024: First alleged incident

According to the complaint, Feagins called Turner downstairs to listen to a conversation with an MSCS board member. Turner alleges she found Feagins standing nude at the bottom of the stairs, looking at her and waiting. Turner says she turned around, went upstairs and did not respond to the conduct.

August 20, 2024: Alleged loss of her position

The next day, Turner alleges, Feagins removed her from the special assistant role, gave the duties to another employee (Monica Jordan), directed Turner to train her replacement, and said she would be moved to a lower-paying Strategy and Innovation Officer position, citing performance problems that had never been raised before. Turner links the timing to the previous evening.

Alleged blame for a Legacy Night budget overrun

Turner alleges Feagins tried to blame her for a budget overrun of more than $50,000 on a “Legacy Night” event at AutoZone Park. She says planning began before she was hired and she had no budget authority over it. The complaint says Feagins had earlier ordered an investigation and a transfer related to the overrun.

September 2024: Alleged requests involving internal communications

The complaint alleges Feagins asked Turner to leak internal communications of senior district officials to the media to influence the board’s evaluation of the superintendent, and to tell principals and community members that Feagins might resign in order to generate public pressure. Turner says she refused.

October 4, 2024: Second alleged incident

Before a University of Memphis basketball event, Turner alleges, Feagins sent her to buy clothing. When Turner returned, Feagins allegedly insisted she stay in the room while Feagins undressed. When Turner turned away, Feagins allegedly remarked that Turner should not act as though she had never seen a naked woman before.

October 5, 2024: Alleged request to dress Feagins at her home

The next day, the complaint alleges, Feagins asked Turner to come to her home to help her dress for another event. Turner declined and offered to discuss clothing for a different event instead.

October 2024: Alleged criticism, threats and exclusion

Turner alleges Feagins then sent many critical emails, blamed her for district-wide problems with emergency communications to parents, berated her in front of senior leaders, excluded her from events and meetings, threatened write-ups and transfers, and blocked her calendar access.

Around October 15, 2024: Resignation

Turner resigned, concluding that further retaliation was imminent. Sources vary slightly on the effective date, with some placing it between October 15 and October 22, 2024.

October 16, 2024: Alleged $20,000 offer

One report of the complaint says Feagins offered Turner an additional $20,000 to stay after she resigned and that Turner declined. Treat this as an allegation in reported coverage.

Source reporting: Chalkbeat, October 30, 2026 and Action News 5.

Why Turner Says She Did Not Report Feagins While Employed at MSCS

The complaint says Turner did not report the conduct while employed because Feagins was the highest-ranking official in the district and the internal reporting channels ultimately ran to her. Turner says she reported the incidents to the district’s general counsel shortly after resigning. Her attorney told Chalkbeat the district then conducted a thorough investigation. The findings of that investigation have not been made public in the materials reviewed.

This matters legally. In supervisor-harassment cases, an employer can sometimes defend by showing it had reasonable anti-harassment procedures and the employee unreasonably failed to use them. That defense is generally unavailable when the harassment culminates in a tangible employment action, such as a demotion or significant reassignment. Turner alleges such an action followed the first incident, and whether it occurred is disputed.

Related article: US Plans to Deport More Than 150 Afghans Through Pakistan to Taliban-Controlled Afghanistan, Laws, Court Challenges and What Detainees Can Do

Is Marie Feagins Personally Being Sued by Camalyn Turner?

No. Title VII generally places liability on the employer, and federal appeals courts, including the Sixth Circuit (see Wathen v. General Electric Co., 115 F.3d 400 (6th Cir. 1997)), have held that individual supervisors are not personally liable under the statute. Turner sued the Shelby County Board of Education, and Feagins’ alleged conduct is the factual basis for the claims against the board.

What has the school district said?

An MSCS spokesperson acknowledged the lawsuit and declined to comment because the matter is pending.

What has Feagins said?

Feagins did not provide a substantive response to reporters about the October 2026 lawsuit. According to The Daily Memphian, she denied harassment allegations when MSCS attorneys raised them at a July 2025 hearing in her separate dispute with the board. Reporting also says some of Feagins’ filings referred to communications about allegations of a sexual nature, which she characterized as fabricated. That earlier denial is not a formal answer to Turner’s complaint.

Turner’s attorney has said the case is not politically motivated and that efforts were made to resolve it privately with the district before filing.

Title VII, Retaliation and Constructive Discharge: The Laws in the Turner v. Shelby County Board of Education Case

Title VII sex discrimination, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)

Title VII bars employers from discriminating against employees because of sex in hiring, firing, pay, assignments and other terms and conditions of employment. See also Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), on what “because of sex” means.

Hostile work environment: Meritor and Harris

In Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986), the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as sex discrimination under Title VII. In Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993), it held that conduct must be both objectively and subjectively hostile or abusive, judged by the totality of the circumstances.

Same-sex harassment: Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services

Turner and Feagins are both women. In Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998), the Supreme Court held that same-sex sexual harassment can violate Title VII, as long as the conduct is discrimination because of sex.

Employer liability: Faragher, Ellerth and Vance v. Ball State

Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998), and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998), set when an employer is responsible for a supervisor’s harassment. If no tangible employment action occurred, the employer may raise the affirmative defense described above. Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. 421 (2013), holds that a “supervisor” for these purposes is someone empowered to take tangible employment actions against the victim. Turner’s allegation that the superintendent controlled her position and pay is aimed at that standard.

Discriminatory transfers: Muldrow v. City of St. Louis

Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, 601 U.S. 346 (2024), held that a transfer claim under Title VII requires showing “some harm” to a term or condition of employment, not “significant” harm. It bears on Turner’s allegations about the threatened move to a lower-paying position.

Retaliation, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a)

Title VII bars retaliation against employees who oppose unlawful discrimination. A plaintiff generally must show protected activity, a materially adverse action and a causal link. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006), sets the “materially adverse” standard, and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, 570 U.S. 338 (2013), requires but-for causation. Whether Turner’s refusals count as protected opposition is a question the court may have to address.

Constructive discharge: Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders

Under Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004), constructive discharge requires conditions so objectively intolerable that a reasonable person would feel compelled to resign. See also Green v. Brennan, 578 U.S. 547 (2016), on when the filing clock starts for such claims.

Other laws that may be relevant but are not reported as pleaded

The coverage reviewed describes only Title VII claims. Separate state and federal laws sometimes apply to similar facts, including the Tennessee Human Rights Act (Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-101 et seq.) and, for federally funded schools, Title IX (20 U.S.C. § 1681). Nothing reviewed indicates those claims are in the complaint.

How Much Is Camalyn Turner Seeking, and Are Title VII Damages Capped?

Reporting identifies a demand of approximately $1.5 million in compensatory damages. The complaint also seeks:

• back pay,
• front pay or compensation in lieu of reinstatement,
• lost benefits,
• compensatory damages, and
• other equitable relief, with a jury trial.

This is a demand, not a settlement or award. Under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(3), compensatory damages for emotional distress and other nonpecuniary losses in Title VII cases are capped by employer size, with the highest tier at $300,000 per claimant for employers with more than 500 employees. Under § 1981a(b)(1), punitive damages are not available against a government, government agency or political subdivision. Back pay and front pay are treated separately from the cap. Because the defendant is a public school board, those limits could significantly affect what Turner can recover if Title VII is the only damages route. The exact amounts depend on the operative complaint and the facts the court ultimately finds.

Official reference: 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.

EEOC Charge No. 490-2025-03551: Right-to-Sue Notice and Filing Deadline

Before suing under Title VII in federal court, an employee generally must file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Turner filed EEOC charge No. 490-2025-03551 alleging sex discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation. The EEOC issued a Determination and Notice of Rights on August 6, 2026, dismissing the charge and giving her the right to sue.

A dismissal and right-to-sue notice is not a finding that the allegations are false, and it is not a judgment on the merits. It allows the employee to go to court. Under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1), a person generally has 90 days after receiving the notice to sue. The date Turner received the notice has not been made public, but October 29, 2026 is within 90 days of the August 6 date on the notice. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 and the EEOC’s guide to filing a lawsuit.

How Is the Turner Lawsuit Different From Feagins v. Shelby County Schools Board of Education?

Both involve the same former superintendent and district, but they are legally separate. Feagins’ own federal case, Feagins v. Shelby County Schools Board of Education, No. 2:26-cv-02292 (W.D. Tenn.), concerns her January 2025 termination. Reporting indicates an October 14, 2026 order lifted a stay in that case, followed by filings on October 27.

Turner’s case concerns alleged workplace conduct in 2024. The two have different plaintiffs, claims and alleged injuries. Turner’s filing does not decide whether the board was right to fire Feagins, and Feagins’ case does not decide whether Turner’s allegations are true. Turner’s attorney has said he wants the new case kept separate.

Is the Camalyn Turner Lawsuit a Class Action?

No. It is an individual employment-discrimination case. There is no class, no class settlement, no compensation fund, no registration process and no claim form. Other MSCS employees cannot join it or receive compensation through it, and any separate claim would face its own legal and administrative requirements, including EEOC filing deadlines.

What Happens Next in Turner v. Shelby County Board of Education?

The Board will respond to the complaint, either by filing an answer or by moving to dismiss some or all claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). If the case proceeds, the parties will exchange documents and take depositions. Evidence likely to matter includes:

• personnel records and communications between Turner and Feagins,
• emails about the alleged transfer and performance criticism,
• Legacy Night budget records,
• records of the reported $20,000 offer,
• the district’s investigation after Turner’s resignation, and
• testimony from other employees and administrators.

As of October 31, 2026, no trial date or hearing has been verified. The district has not admitted wrongdoing, and no court has found that Feagins engaged in the conduct alleged.

Related School District and Employment Lawsuits on AllAboutLawyer

These cases involve different parties and legal questions and are not connected to Turner or Feagins:

1. Shady Side Academy Sued for Wrongful Termination After Firing Nursing Director Who Flagged Child Safety Violations
2. Kathy McCord vs. South Madison Schools Settlement, What the $195,000 Case Means for Educators
3. Hollidaysburg LGBTQ+ Display Lawsuit, Federal Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss as Moot After Teachers Amend Complaint

Frequently Asked Questions About the Marie Feagins and Camalyn Turner Lawsuit

Is Marie Feagins being sued for sexual harassment?

Turner’s lawsuit accuses Feagins of sexual harassment, but Feagins is not named as a defendant. Turner sued the Shelby County Board of Education.

Who filed the lawsuit?

Camalyn S. Turner, a former special assistant to then-Superintendent Marie Feagins.

What does Camalyn Turner allege?

That Feagins exposed herself to her twice in 2024, removed her from her position and threatened a lower-paying transfer after the first incident, and retaliated against her until she resigned.

When did the alleged incidents occur?

August 19, 2024 at Feagins’ residence, and October 4, 2024 before a University of Memphis basketball event, according to the complaint.

Why did Turner resign?

She says the alleged harassment, loss of duties, threatened pay cut and continued pressure made her working conditions intolerable.

How much money is Turner seeking?

Reports cite about $1.5 million in compensatory damages plus lost pay, benefits and other relief. It is a demand, and Title VII caps compensatory damages.

What is the case number and court?

No. 2:26-cv-03456, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Western Division.

Who represents Turner?

Murray B. Wells of Wells & Associates, PLLC.

What has Memphis-Shelby County Schools said?

The district acknowledged the lawsuit and declined to comment because it is pending.

Did the EEOC find that Feagins harassed Turner?

No. Reports say the EEOC dismissed the charge and issued a right-to-sue notice on August 6, 2026. That is not a finding of liability or of no discrimination.

Can two women bring a Title VII sexual-harassment claim?

Yes. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998), held that same-sex harassment can violate Title VII.

Is this connected to Feagins’ lawsuit over her firing?

No. They are separate cases, one about alleged 2024 workplace conduct and the other about her 2025 termination.

Has a court ruled against the school district?

No. The lawsuit was filed October 29, 2026, and no merits ruling has been reported.

Is there a settlement or claim form?

No. It is an individual federal employment case.

Sources and Legal References

School district records

1. MSCS: Superintendent Announces Special Assistant, June 11, 2024
2. MSCS Organizational Chart, October 2024

Lawsuit and reporting

3. Complaint, Turner v. Shelby County Board of Education, No. 2:26-cv-03456 (W.D. Tenn. filed Oct. 29, 2026), as reproduced and reported by the outlets below
4. Action News 5: Lawsuit Accuses Former MSCS Superintendent Marie Feagins of Sexual Harassment
5. Chalkbeat Tennessee: Former MSCS Employee Sues District, October 30, 2026
6. Memphis Report: Former MSCS Aide Sues District Over Marie Feagins Allegations
7. The Commercial Appeal: Marie Feagins Exposed Herself to a Staffer, Lawsuit Says

Federal statutes

8. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2
9. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3
10. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5
11. 42 U.S.C. § 1981a
12. Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-101 et seq.; 20 U.S.C. § 1681; Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)

Cases

13. Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986)
14. Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993)
15. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998)
16. Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998)
17. Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998)
18. Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004)
19. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006)
20. Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. 421 (2013)
21. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, 570 U.S. 338 (2013)
22. Green v. Brennan, 578 U.S. 547 (2016)
23. Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020)
24. Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, 601 U.S. 346 (2024)
25. Wathen v. General Electric Co., 115 F.3d 400 (6th Cir. 1997)

Disclaimer: AllAboutLawyer.com is an independent legal information website, not a law firm. This article is general information, not legal advice. Allegations in a complaint are not findings of fact.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the complaint in Turner v. Shelby County Board of Education, No. 2:26-cv-03456, as reproduced and reported by Chalkbeat and Action News 5, the Memphis-Shelby County Schools June 11, 2024 appointment announcement and October 2024 organizational chart, and the federal statutes cited, as of October 31, 2026. Last Updated: October 31, 2026.