UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Plaintiff Sharolynn L. Griffiths, by and through her undersigned counsel, by way of JURISDICTION

Transcription

1 Case :-cv-000-ckj Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Jenne S. Forbes PCC #; SB# LAW OFFICES WATERFALL, ECONOMIDIS, CALDWELL HANSHAW & VILLAMANA, P.C. Williams Center, Eighth Floor 0 E. Williams Circle Tucson, AZ (0) 0- Attorneys for Plaintiff Griffiths SHAROLYNN L. GRIFFITHS, a single woman, vs. Plaintiff, CITY OF TUCSON, a municipal corporation of the State of Arizona, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA No.: COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Plaintiff Sharolynn L. Griffiths, by and through her undersigned counsel, by way of complaint against Defendant City of Tucson, says: JURISDICTION. This Court has original jurisdiction of this action under U.S.C., the Court s federal question jurisdiction, since the action arises under the Civil Rights Act of, as amended, U.S.C. 000e et seq. ( Title VII ). GENERAL ALLEGATIONS. Plaintiff Sharolynn L. Griffiths, a single woman, is a resident of Pima County, Arizona.. Defendant City of Tucson is a municipal corporation of the State of Arizona.. The acts and conduct of which Plaintiff complains occurred in Pima County, Arizona.

2 Case :-cv-000-ckj Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0. On or about December, 00, Plaintiff began her employment with Defendant as a law clerk in the City of Tucson Public Defender Office. In or about August 00, Plaintiff was promoted to a position as Assistant Public Defender in that office.. At or about the time of her promotion to Assistant Public Defender, Plaintiff was assigned to work in the courtrooms of certain City Court judicial officers.. Commencing in or about November 00 and continuing until in or about October 00, one of the City Court judges subjected her to pervasive and egregious sexual harassment on a daily basis, including, without limitation, sexually explicit s and text messages, verbal comments, and physical conduct. Some of the verbal conduct occurred in the presence of others, including clients, co-workers, prosecutors, and court staff.. The City Court judge reminded Plaintiff that it would not be good for Plaintiff s career and for the public defender s office in general if Plaintiff continued to reject his sexual advances. The judge also reminded Plaintiff about his role in her performance evaluations.. The conduct of the City Court judge was unwelcome to Plaintiff, and Plaintiff made clear that it was unwelcome, but the judge continued his harassment. 0. Upon information and belief, Defendant knew about the judge s inappropriate conduct toward females before the incidents involving Plaintiff came to light, but the Defendant failed to take action to address the behavior and by its own conduct, ratified the judge s harassment.

3 Case :-cv-000-ckj Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0. On or about October, 00, after Plaintiff had once again rejected the judge s advances, the judge publicly chastised, berated and humiliated Plaintiff in open court without cause and in retaliation for her refusal to accede to his sexual advances.. Plaintiff timely filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Arizona Civil Rights Division, which Charge was dual-filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ).. The EEOC has issued a notice of right to sue to Plaintiff. FIRST COUNT Title VII Violation Sex Harassment. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every one of the above allegations as if set forth at length herein.. Defendant is an employer within the meaning of the Civil Rights Act of, as amended, U.S.C. 000e et seq. ( Title VII ).. Defendant unlawfully discriminated against Plaintiff because of her sex in violation of Title VII, and specifically, U.S.C. 000e-(a), by subjecting her to severe or pervasive conduct that was subjectively and objectively offensive and changed the terms and conditions of her employment and created a hostile work environment.. Defendant knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt and effective action to prevent the conduct.. As a consequence of the discriminatory actions of Defendant, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including, without limitation, pain and suffering, emotional distress, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life.

4 Case :-cv-000-ckj Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 SECOND COUNT Title VII Violation Retaliation. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every one of the above allegations as if set forth at length herein. 0. Under Title VII it is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against any of its employees because the employee opposed any practice which is an unlawful practice under Title VII.. Defendant unlawfully retaliated against Plaintiff by subjecting her to an adverse employment action because of her protected activity.. As a consequence of the discriminatory actions of Defendant, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including, without limitation, pain and suffering, emotional distress, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Sharolynn L. Griffiths requests that judgment be entered against Defendant City of Tucson for the following relief: A. An order adjudging and declaring that Defendant violated Title VII, and ordering it to take such action as will ensure that other female employees are not subjected to discrimination and harassment on the basis of sex, including, without limitation, an appropriate anti-harassment policy statement, the posting of notices, development and implementation of an appropriate process, and training of managers and employee on discrimination and harassment; B. Compensatory damages pursuant to U.S.C. a; C. Attorney s fees, pursuant to U.S.C. 000e-(k);

5 Case :-cv-000-ckj Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 D. Costs of suit; and E. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. JURY DEMAND Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable. DATED this th day of June, 0. WATERFALL ECONOMIDIS CALDWELL HANSHAW & VILLAMANA, P.C. By s/ Jenne S. Forbes Jenne S. Forbes Attorneys for Plaintiff I hereby certify that on June, 0, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing. s/ Jenne S. Forbes