IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Transcription

1 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 1 1 of of 9 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LISA DOHNER, Civil Action vs. Plaintiff, No. CLEARFIELD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, REX READ, Clearfield County Commissioner, in his individual capacity, MARK McCRACKEN, Clearfield County Commissioner, in his individual capacity, Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CIVIL COMPLAINT 1. The Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(3); Section 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. 216(b), incorporating by reference the Equal Pay Act of 1963, 29 U.S.C. 206(d); 42 U.S.C. 1983, 28 U.S.C 1331, 1343(a)(3) and (a)(4) and this Court s Supplemental Jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C Plaintiff has satisfied all the procedural and administrative requirements set forth in Section 706 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-5, and in particular: a. Plaintiff filed a timely written complaint of discrimination with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission on August 15, 2006, which which was cross-filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity alleging she was discharged because of her sex, and in retaliation for complaining of sex discrimination, and also paid unequal wages because of her sex. b. Plaintiff received a Notice of Right to Sue from the U. S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division on January 3,

2 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 2 2 of of 9 9 c. This action was filed with this Court within 90 days of receipt of that Notice. d. More than a year has passed since Plaintiff filed with the PHRC and the PHRC has neither dismissed her action nor has it entered into a conciliation agreement to which she is a party. II. The Parties 3. Plaintiff, Lisa Dohner is a female individual who at all times relevant hereto was employed by Defendant Clearfield County as Director of the Office of Children & Youth. She resides at 332 Turnpike Avenue, Clearfield, Pennsylvania Defendant Clearfield County is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and, at all times relevant hereto, was Plaintiff s employer, and was an Employer within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 2000e(b). Its principal place of business is 230 East Market Street, Clearfield, Pennsylvania Defendant Rex Read at all times relevant hereto was a Clearfield County Commissioner, and therefore was a state actor. He is sued in his individual capacity, pursuant to 42 U.S.C He resides at 12 Carbon Mine Road, Clearfield, Pennsylvania, Defendant, Mark McCracken, at all times relevant hereto was a Clearfield County Commissioner, and therefore was a state actor. He is sued in his individual capacity, pursuant to 42 U.S.C He resides at 706 Cambria Drive, Clearfield, Pennsylvania III. Factual Background 7. Dohner has worked for Defendant Clearfield County for 18 years, the last three as Administrator of the Clearfield County Office of Children & Youth. Throughout her employment, she performed her job duties in a more than satisfactory manner. 8. However, beginning in October 2004, on an almost daily basis, Defendant Reed began 2

3 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 3 3 of of 9 9 to threaten Dohner, and on numerous occasions told her that a man could better perform her duties. 9. On or about March 16, 2006, Dohner complained to the Commissions alleging that Reed, and Clearfield County discriminated against her because of her sex by creating a hostile work environment because of her sex, and therefore discriminated against her in a term and condition of employment. 10. On March 28, 2006, pursuant to a vote of Defendant s Reed and McCracken. Clearfield County fired Dohner. 11. Throughout her employment Clearfield County paid Dohner less than it paid similarly situated men for work involving the same skill, effort and responsibility. 12. For example, Clearfield County paid Dohner $38, as Administrator of the Office of Children & Youth, but paid Don Mcclusick, Director of Probation, 42,440.63; paid Rick Redden, Director of Domestic Relations $40, restated. Count I Title VII Discrimination Dohner v. Clearfield County 13. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in Paragraph 1-12 as if fully 14. Clearfield County fired Dohner because of her sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a)(1). 15. Clearfield County s discharge of Dohner was undertaken with malice and/or reckless indifference to Dohner s federally protected rights. 16. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant s actions, Dohner has sustained lost 3

4 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 4 4 of of 9 9 wages, as well as emotional distress, inconvenience and humiliation. WHEREFORE, Dohner demands judgment against Defendant Clearfield County, and the following relief: a. That the Court enter a judgment declaring Defendant s actions to be unlawful and in violation of Title VII.; b That Defendant be ordered to reinstate Dohner and provide her accumulated seniority, fringe benefits and all other rights; c. That Defendant be required to compensate Dohner for the full value of wages she would have received had it not been for Defendant s illegal treatment of her with interest from the date of discharge in addition to reimbursement for lost pension, social security, experience, training opportunities and other benefits; d. That the Court award Dohner compensatory damages as a result of Defendant s violations of Title VII; e. That Defendant be enjoined from discriminating against Dohner in any manner that violates Title VII; f. That Dohner be awarded against Defendant the costs and expenses of this litigation and a reasonable attorney fee; and g. That the Court grant Dohner additional relief as may be just and proper. Count II Equal Protection Dohner v. Defendants 17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1-16 as if fully restated herein. 18. Defendants, under color of state law, fired Dohner because of her gender and therefore deprived her of equal protection of law in derogation of the Equal Protection clause of the th 14 Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and 42, U.S.C

5 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 5 5 of of 9 9 purpose. 19. Defendants discharge of Dohner was not rationally related to a legitimate government 20. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant s gender discrimination and deprivation of Dohner s rights under the Equal Protection Clause, Dohner lost her job from a position she was qualified to perform and thus suffered the injuries set forth at length above. 21. Defendant s actions toward Dohner were intentional and undertaken under color of state law, with reckless disregard of Dohner s right to the equal protection of the law. 22. The conduct by Defendant as set forth above was a conscious choice on Defendant s part to disregard Plaintiff s constitutional right and deprived Dohner, because of her sex and without any rational basis, under color of state law of her right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution in violation of 42 U.S.C As a direct and proximate result of Defendant s discrimination, Dohner has suffered the following injuries: a. Loss of income and benefits; b. Emotional distress and anxiety; c. Humiliation; d. Loss of reputation; and e. Inconvenience. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for deprivation of her right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. 1983, as follows: a. That Defendant be permanently enjoined from depriving Dohner of equal protection of law; 5

6 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 6 6 of of 9 9 b. That Defendant be ordered to reinstate Dohner to the position of Administrator of the Office of Children & Youth, with all lost pay and benefits; c. That Dohner be awarded compensatory damages to compensate for pain, suffering, emotional distress and humiliation she suffered as a result of Defendant s conduct; d. That Dohner be awarded against Defendant the costs and expenses of this litigation, and, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988, a reasonable attorney's fee; e. That Dohner be awarded punitive damages against Defendant s Reed and/or McCracken in their individual capacities; and f. That Dohner be awarded such further relief as this Court deems to be just and proper. Count III Title VII Retaliation Dohner v. Clearfield County 24. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1-23 as if fully restated herein. 25. Clearfield County fired Dohner because she participated in a proceeding under Title VII and also because she opposed conduct made illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a)(1), and therefore violated 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3(a). 26. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant s actions, Dohner has sustained lost wages, as well as emotional distress, inconvenience and humiliation. relief: WHEREFORE, Dohner demands judgment against Clearfield County and the following a. That the Court enter a judgment declaring Defendant s actions to be unlawful and in violation of Title VII; 6

7 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 7 7 of of 9 9 b That Defendant be ordered to reinstate Dohner and provide her accumulated seniority, fringe benefits and all other rights; c. That Defendant be required to compensate Dohner for the full value of wages she would have received had it not been for Defendant s illegal treatment of her with interest from the date of discharge in addition to reimbursement for lost pension, social security, experience, training opportunities and other benefits; d. That the Court award Dohner compensatory damages as a result of Defendant s violations of Title VII; e. That Defendant be enjoined from discriminating against Dohner in any manner that violates Title VII; f. That Defendant be awarded against Defendant the costs and expenses of this litigation and a reasonable attorney fee; and g. That the Court grant Dohner additional relief as may be just and proper. Count IV First Amendment Dohner v. Read and McCracken 27. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1-26 as if fully restated herein. 28. Read and McCracken, under color of state law, fired Dohner in retaliation for her complaints of sex discrimination, and therefore retaliated against her for exercising her right to speak freely in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C Read and McCracken likewise, under color of state law, fired Dohner in retaliation for filing complaints of discrimination with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and therefore also retaliated against Dohner for exercising her right to petition the government for redress of grievances in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C

8 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 8 8 of of Defendant s discharge of Dohner was undertaken with malice and/or reckless indifference to Dohner s federally protected right to speak freely and to petition the government for redress of grievances. 31. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant s actions, Dohner has sustained lost wages, as well as emotional distress, inconvenience and humiliation. WHEREFORE, Dohner demands judgment against Defendants Read and McCracken, and the following relief: a. That the Court enter a judgment declaring Defendant s actions to be unlawful and in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C. 1983; c. That Defendants Read and McCracken be required to compensate Dohner for the full value of wages she would have received had it not been for Defendants illegal treatment of her with interest from the date of discharge in addition to reimbursement for lost pension, social security, experience, training opportunities and other benefits; d. That the Court award Dohner compensatory damages; e. That the Court award Dohner with punitive damages against Read and/or McCracken in their individual capacities; f. That Dohner be awarded against Defendants Read and/or McCracken the costs and expenses of this litigation and a reasonable attorney fee; and g. That the Court grant Dohner additional relief as may be just and proper. 8

9 Case 3:08-cv KRG 3:05-mc Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 9 9 of of 9 9 Respectfully submitted, OGG, CORDES, MURPHY & IGNELZI /S/ Samuel J. Cordes Samuel J. Cordes Pa. I.D. No Fort Pitt Boulevard Pittsburgh, PA (412) Attorney for Plaintiff 9