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

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

Case3:05-cv WHA Document1 Filed02/14/05 Page1 of 5

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

CASE NO. 5:00-CV COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION ON BEHALF OF JACKQULINE STOKES

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/25/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1

Case 8:04-cv SCB-TBM Document 32 Filed 10/07/2005 Page 1 of 6

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

PLAINTIFF AVA SMITH- THOMPSON S COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT SARA LEE CORPORATION

Case 1:07-cv NLH-AMD Document 1 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 1 of 12

Courthouse News Service

Case 3:04-cv JSW Document 168 Filed 10/20/2005 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

2. One of the defendant in the case is Parker & Gould (P&G). What is exactly P&G?

Case 1:18-cv RDB Document 1 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE DIVISION

Case 3:04-cv RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

)

Case 2:13-cv JFC Document 1 Filed 06/27/13 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:16-cv GMN-VCF Document 1 Filed 04/26/16 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

NATURE OF THE ACTION. This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA DAVENPORT DIVISION. Nature Of The Action

Case 5:15-cv SAC-KGS Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

Case 5:12-cv LS Document 1 Filed 03/19/12 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:15-cv KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2015 Page 1 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

Introduction. Jurisdiction. Parties

Courthouse News Service

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Plaintiff, CIVIL COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 4:10-cv CW Document 1 Filed 10/13/10 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Case 2:14-cv MPK Document 1 Filed 04/22/14 Page 1 of 6

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 1 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:10-cv WOB-JGW Document 1 Filed 04/29/10 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:14-cv RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE STATE OF COLORADO

9:12-cv PMD-BHH Date Filed 09/17/12 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. Plaintiff, Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND NATURE OF ACTION

Case 2:09-cv BSJ-RLE Document 67 Filed 10/28/11 Page 1 of 6

Case: 1:06-cv JRA Doc #: 28 Filed: 05/08/09 1 of 9. PageID #: 220

Case 0:15-cv WJZ Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2015 Page 1 of 9. Exhibit A

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

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

)(

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

Case 3:17-cv UN4 Document 1 Filed 08/24/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Case 4:16-cv JEG-CFB Document 1 Filed 12/23/16 Page 1 of 13

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/10/14 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 1:14-cv KAM-JO Document 8 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 36

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT! WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN! SOUTHERN DIVISION!

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:08-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/16/2008 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

3:14-cv SEM-TSH # 1 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION

2:18-cv CSB-EIL # 1 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS URBANA DIVISION COMPLAINT

Courthouse News Service

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION Case No. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 4:07-cv JLH Document 1 Filed 06/29/2007 ( Page 1 of 6

Case 3:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/30/19 Page 1 of 17

Case 3:04-cv KRG Document 22 Filed 08/08/2005 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FILED. , #, Case 5:05-cv WRF Document 29 Filed 06/06/2006Page 1 of 9 JUN COMMISSION, Plaintiff, ALICIA MANSEL, Civil Action No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Plaintiffs, Case No.: VERIFIED COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CASS COUNTY, MISSOURI AT HARRISONVILLE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, WESTERN DIVISION

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 07/20/17 Page 1 of 8

Case 4:15-cv RLY-DML Document 1 Filed 07/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI`I ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT. Introduction

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Civil Division General Docket

Case 2:17-cv JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 17

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/29/16 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ~,~,~,,.c~...,... ~~"~ ~ " FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLI~ SEP -9 ;i ~ [~: 0~ CBA~OTTE OIVlSlON

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA NATURE OF THE ACTION

Case 2:14-cv MRH Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Case No.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 0:08-cv JRT-FLN Document 1 Filed 01/04/2008 Page 1 of 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case 0:10-cv KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/10/2010 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv JTM-TJJ Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 2:07-cv JFB-WDW Document 15-2 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 1 of 10 CIVIL ACTION INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION JUDGE:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF OHIO EASTERN DISTRICT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Courthouse News Service

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demand)

Case 3:11-cv CRW-TJS Document 1 Filed 04/06/11 Page 1 of 7

Transcription:

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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. 1367. 2. 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, 2008. 1

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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 16830. 4. 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 16830. 5. 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. 1983. He resides at 12 Carbon Mine Road, Clearfield, Pennsylvania, 16830. 6. 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. 1983. He resides at 706 Cambria Drive, Clearfield, Pennsylvania 16830. 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

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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, 008.00 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 $40,316.58. 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

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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. 1983. 4

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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. 1983. 23. 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

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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. 1983. 29. 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. 1983. 7

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 Document 23 1 Filed 03/04/2008 Page 8 8 of of 9 9 30. 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

Case 3:08-cv-00052-KRG 3:05-mc-02025 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. 54874 245 Fort Pitt Boulevard Pittsburgh, PA 15222 (412) 471-8500 Attorney for Plaintiff 9