Case 1:14-cv-01483-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 Case No. CANDICE ZAMORA BRIDGERS, vs. Plaintiff, CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, by and through its CITY COUNCIL, the governing body for the City of Colorado Springs; KARA SKINNER, Chief Financial Officer for the City of Colorado Springs; MICHAEL SULLIVAN, Human Resource Director; and JOHN DOES 1-3, Defendants. COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Candice Zamora Bridgers, also known as Candice Bridgers, hereby brings this legal action against the City of Colorado Springs, by and through its City Council; Kara Skinner, Chief Financial Officer for the City of Colorado Springs; and Michael Sullivan, Human Resource Director for the City of Colorado Springs. I. INTRODUCTION 1. This legal action is brought by Ms. Zamora Bridgers against the Defendants as a result of her illegal and discriminatory targeting, creation of hostile work environment and termination from employment in her position with the City of Colorado Springs. The -1-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 21 termination of Ms. Zamora Bridgers was issued on November 15, 2012 and became effective December 16, 2012. 2. Ms. Zamora Bridgers, who is of Hispanic/Mexican-American descent, was a longtime City of Colorado Springs employee who had been routinely recognized for excellent work in the Revenue and Collection Division and then in the Financial Department. Ms. Zamora Bridgers was one of the highest ranking Hispanics, Mexican-Americans, by position in City employment outside of the Police Department and Fire Department at the time she was fired. 3. Ms. Zamora Bridgers is a licensed CPA, who worked with Terri Velasquez and was specifically targeted by Defendants because of her association and support for Ms. Velasquez. After Ms. Velasquez made claims she was subjected to an illegal employment action, including gender discrimination and retaliation. 4. Ms. Zamora Bridgers, in an internal City of Colorado Springs investigation relating to Ms. Velasquez claim of gender discrimination and retaliation, provided information during an interview that supported Ms. Velasquez claim of hostile work environment and discrimination. Further, Ms. Zamora Bridgers was listed and designated as a witness who would support Ms. Velasquez claims of discrimination, Ms. Velasquez EEOC charge of discrimination and then in litigation filed by Ms. Velasquez against the City of Colorado Springs. Ms. Zamora Bridgers opposed the unlawful employment practice directed against Ms. Velasquez and her participation in the investigation relating to Ms. Velasquez charge of illegal employment practices was protected under federal law, state law, and City of Colorado Springs ordinance. -2-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 21 5. In July 2011, after Ms. Velasquez was discharged, Ms. Zamora Bridgers was informed by Defendant Skinner that the City was looking to eliminate her position. She was also told that she was too aligned with Ms. Velasquez, who was making claims or suing the City. 6. Throughout July 2011 Ms. Zamora Bridgers was targeted by City officials for negative treatment, including Defendant Skinner. 7. In August 2011, the HR Director for the City of Colorado Springs, Ann Crossey, inferred that Ms. Zamora Bridgers was not loyal to the City because of her association or support for Terri Velasquez. Ms. Crossey threatened Ms. Zamora Bridgers with termination if she was giving any information or documents to Ms. Velasquez that would support Ms. Velasquez position. This claim or assertion was baseless and untrue. It demonstrated the targeting that was occurring. 8. The targeting of Ms. Zamora Bridgers continued throughout August 2011, including Ann Crossey attempting to compel Ms. Zamora Bridgers to transfer to the Auditors Office and take a pay cut. 9. The continued harassment and targeting resulted in Ms. Zamora Bridgers making a verbal outcry of discrimination to the Human Resource Department. No investigation was undertaken at that time. 10. Ms. Zamora Bridgers targeting temporarily abated in early 2012 when Steve Hilfers was named Acting Chief Financial Officer, however, after Mr. Hilfers left the position and Defendant Skinner was named Chief Financial Officer, Ms. Skinner resumed her attacks and targeting of Ms. Zamora Bridgers. -3-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 21 11. In June 2012 Ms. Skinner informed the Plaintiff that she should pursue a severance package because Ms. Skinner was going to terminate her employment. 12. The attempt to force Ms. Zamora Bridgers from employment was coordinated between Ms. Skinner and Defendant Michael Sullivan, who had been appointed as Human Resource Director. In June 2012, Mr. Sullivan indicated that Ms. Zamora Bridgers should just find somewhere else go. 13. Ms. Zamora Bridgers is told in June 2012 that she will be put on a performance improvement plan, but that she would fail. This statement was made to her by Defendant Skinner. Mr. Sullivan is told about this and refuses to intervene. 14. In order to escape from the targeting and hostile environment, Ms. Zamora Bridgers sought other positions with the City, including a position at the airport for which she was fully qualified. Ms. Zamora Bridgers was unsuccessful in obtaining any other position despite her qualifications. 15. In August 2012 the Defendants implement the threats against Ms. Zamora Bridgers by providing a negative job evaluation, unlike all prior evaluations from 1999 forward that showed Ms. Zamora Bridgers was performing at the level of outstanding or exceeding expectations. The evaluation was signed by Defendant Skinner and issued with the approval of Defendant Sullivan. Prior to this evaluation being issued, job duties had been stripped from Ms. Zamora Bridgers and her job title had been changed. -4-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 21 16. On September 3, 2012, Ms. Zamora Bridgers filed a complaint asserting that the negative job evaluation was improper and was illegally motivated by her involvement with Ms. Velasquez claims and illegal motivated based on national origin/race and age. 17. Because of the escalating situation, Ms. Zamora Bridgers then filed an internal complaint of discrimination with the City on October 3, 2012 in which she asserted wrongful discrimination in the form of retaliation, race and national origin discrimination and age discrimination. 18. Within one week of receipt of the claim of discrimination, the City and specifically Ms. Skinner, issued a Performance Improvement Plan to Ms. Zamora Bridgers. This was dated October 12, 2012. The plan indicated that it was effective immediately and last for 60 days. This was done with the consent of Defendant Sullivan. 19. Ms. Zamora Bridgers was then notified on October 19, 2012 that the City would conduct a workplace investigation into her allegations and that Mountain States Employers Council, Inc. had been hired to do the investigation. Ms. Zamora Bridgers was told that she should meet with the investigator on October 21, 2012. 20. Pursuant to that notice, Ms. Zamora Bridgers met with the investigator as requested, with the meeting occurring on or about October 23, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. The meeting lasted several hours. Both Defendant Skinner and Defendant Sullivan were aware of the meeting and investigation. 21. Ms. Zamora Bridgers was then terminated from employment on November 15, 2012. This was before the investigation was completed on her claim of illegal discriminatory -5-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 21 conduct in the workplace and before the 60 day period called for in the Performance Improvement Plan had elapsed. 22. The termination letter was issued on behalf of the City with the consent and approval of the top City officials. Defendant Skinner signed the letter and a copy was sent to Defendant Sullivan. Defendant Sullivan took no steps to stop the termination and, in fact, approved and consented to the termination and conspired with Defendant Skinner to terminate the Plaintiff before the discrimination investigation was completed and before the 60 day PIP period had elapsed. 23. This is yet another clear case of illegal targeting of a valuable employee of the City of Colorado Springs under the regime of Mayor Bach. The targeting has been done maliciously, wilfully, intentionally and in reckless disregard of constitutional and statutory rights of the employee. This targeting violated public policy under state law, as well as under federal law. 24. Ms. Zamora Bridgers, through her legal counsel, provided a Governmental Immunity Notice to the City concerning the wrongful and improper conduct, including the termination, which notice was dated March 5, 2013. Receipt of this notice was acknowledged on March 15, 2013 by Betsy Meyer, Claims Adjusters for the City of Colorado Springs. 25. The City of Colorado Springs, however, refused to remediate the wrongs committed. 26. Plaintiff in this action seeks remediation in the form of damages and monetary compensation for the actions taken against her. She further seeks other equitable action, -6-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 21 including name clearing action from what was and is a wrongful and illegal labeling of the Plaintiff as unsuccessful employee. II. PARTIES 27. Candice Zamora Bridgers is a former employee of the City of Colorado Springs. Ms. Zamora Bridgers began employment with the City of Colorado Springs in 1998 and was continuously employed with the City of Colorado Springs until her termination in November 2012. Ms. Zamora Bridgers is of Mexican-American/Hispanic origin. She resides in Penrose, Colorado. For several years Ms. Zamora Bridgers held the position of Auditor for the City of Colorado Springs. Because of her excellent performance, she was promoted and rose to a position of Revenue and Collections Manager for the City of Colorado Springs, in the Department of Finance, Division of Revenue and Collection. Following the removal of Terri Velasquez as head of the Department of Finance, Ms. Candice Zamora Bridgers was illegally targeted as set forth above in this Complaint and terminated from employment on November 15, 2012, effective December 16, 2012. At the time of her termination, job duties had been stripped from Ms. Zamora Bridgers and she held the position of Accounting Manager, which was a demotion. 28. The City of Colorado Springs is a municipal corporation with a strong mayoral form of government. The City is also governed through a City Council. The City of Colorado Springs is sued through its City Council, the designated governing body for purposes of litigation. At all times, Ms. Zamora Bridgers, the Plaintiff, was classified as a member of the work force that was civilian personnel. The City of Colorado Springs, pursuant to its power and -7-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 21 authority instituted certain policies and procedures in a manual that was effective at the time of Plaintiff s employment. The personnel policy manual creates public policy for the City and constitutes binding contractual terms, which have been relied upon by City employees. The City of Colorado Springs, prior to the time of Plaintiff s termination from employment, had in effect an antidiscrimination policy, Policy #35, that prohibited discrimination and harassment. This policy and procedure prohibit retaliation and states the City of Colorado Springs will not tolerate retaliation against any employee who makes a complaint, or who participates in an investigation into alleged acts or of unlawful discrimination and harassment. This same policy indicates an individual engaged in acts of retaliation shall be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination. The City of Colorado Springs brought no action against Defendants Skinner or Sullivan relating to the treatment of Candice Bridgers Zamora. 29. The City of Colorado Springs is an employer for purposes of Title VII. It employs more than 2000 employees. 30. The City of Colorado Springs is a person for purposes of civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and is subject to the provisions and prohibitions of 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 42 U.S.C. 1983. 31. Defendant Kara Skinner is the Chief Financial Officer for the City of Colorado Springs. She is white. Ms. Skinner was appointed to the Chief Financial Officer position for the City of Colorado Springs in approximately June 2012. At a prior time she had served as the Acting Chief Financial Officer during periods in 2011. All actions taken by Kara Skinner are actions taken under color of law, ordinance, rule, regulation, statute, custom, practice and usage -8-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 21 of the City of Colorado Springs. Her actions were ratified, approved and condoned by higher officials and her actions are binding on the City of Colorado Springs as if the actions were taken by the highest officials. Ms. Skinner was given authority to make the ultimate decision concerning Ms. Zamora Bridgers termination and other acts which are complained of herein. 32. Defendant Michael Sullivan a/k/a Mike Sullivan, is the Human Resource Director for the City of Colorado Springs. Mr. Sullivan was appointed to his position as HR Director in calendar year 2012. Mr. Sullivan actively engaged in joint action and conspiracy with Kara Skinner to illegally terminate the employment of Candice Zamora Bridgers. All actions taken by Mr. Sullivan were actions taken under color of law, statute, rule, regulation, practice and usage. 33. Both Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Skinner knew of Ms. Zamora Bridgers involvement in Ms. Velasquez claims of discrimination and the investigation of such; knew that Ms. Zamora Bridgers provided supporting information regarding the alleged illegal treatment of Ms. Velasquez; knew that she opposed alleged discriminatory practices by the City of Colorado Springs; knew that she had made a protected outcry concerning discrimination being perpetrated against her; and knew at the time of her termination that an ongoing investigation was being undertaken by the City of Colorado Springs relating to Ms. Zamora Bridgers assertion that her job evaluations and performance improvement plan were illegally motivated. 34. Defendants Skinner and Sullivan each acted with wrongful animus, including but not limited to retaliatory animus. Defendants Skinner and Sullivan each knew that Ms. Zamora Bridgers was of Hispanic origin and descent and knew that the treatment being perpetrated against her, including her write-ups and other forms of targeting, were dissimilar and unequal to -9-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 21 the treatment afforded white employees. Each of the individual Defendants acted with wrongful discriminatory animus making them individually liable for injuries suffered by Candice Zamora Bridgers. 35. Alternatively the City of Colorado Springs and Michael Sullivan knew of the wrongful and improper animus of Kara Skinner and failed to prevent and stop Ms. Skinner from acting with wrongful and improper animus toward Ms. Zamora Bridgers. III. JURISDICTION 36. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331; 28 U.S.C. 1343; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5 relating to Title VII. Further, this Court has supplemental jurisdiction over state claims arising from the same factual nexus as the federal claims. IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 37. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates all previous paragraphs 1 through 21 above. 38. Plaintiff Candice Zamora Bridgers had substantially greater seniority in employment with the City of Colorado Springs than did Defendant Kara Skinner. 39. Ms. Zamora Bridgers was certified as a CPA, but Ms. Skinner was not certified as a CPA. 40. Kara Skinner had been employed for approximately five years with the City of Colorado Springs at the time she was appointed acting supervisor of the unit in which Ms. Zamora Bridgers worked. -10-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 21 41. Ms. Zamora Bridgers had substantially greater experience relating to the working functions and requirements of the job as Chief Financial Officer or head of the finance department for the City of Colorado Springs than Ms. Skinner. 42. Defendant Skinner was appointed Chief Financial Officer by either Steven Cox, the Chief of Staff for the Mayor, or the Mayor without providing Ms. Zamora Bridgers an opportunity to apply for the position or interview for the position. 43. Ms. Skinner, upon assuming Acting Chief Financial Officer, excluded Ms. Zamora Bridgers from communications, meetings and was overtly hostile to her from the inception of her appointment. 44. In July 8, 2012, Ms. Skinner went to Ms. Zamora Bridgers office, closed the door and became verbally abusive to her, speaking loudly and angrily toward her. This situation was not provoked or caused by Ms. Zamora Bridgers. 45. On July 20, 2012, Ms. Skinner made the statement to Ms. Zamora Bridgers that Ms. Zamora Bridgers was not selected or chosen to manage the financial department because she was too tightly aligned with someone who is suing the City or bringing claims against the City. This comment was related to claims made by Ms. Terri Velasquez. 46. This statement was verified by an outside investigator who was investigating Ms. Zamora Bridgers claims of retaliation and discrimination. 47. In calendar year 2011, at the time Ms. Skinner was placed in her position as Interim Finance Director or Interim Finance Manager, Ms. Skinner reported to Steve Cox. -11-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 21 48. Steve Cox was an individual named by Ms. Velasquez as the person who was directly responsible for perpetrating discriminatory conduct against her. 49. Ms. Zamora Bridgers filed a charge of discrimination with EEOC on June 10, 2013, asserting discrimination by national origin, color, age and retaliation. She asserted that the discrimination took place between July 1, 2011 and November 15, 2012. 50. Ms. Zamora Bridgers received a right to sue letter dated February 27, 2014. This letter was received on or around March 3, 2014. 51. As a result of the treatment by the City of Colorado Springs and the named Defendants, Ms. Zamora Bridgers suffered severe stress and emotional upset. She received medical treatment for such and was out of work for periods of time. 52. As a direct and proximate result of the discriminatory treatment suffered by Ms. Zamora Bridgers, Ms. Zamora Bridgers suffered loss of wages, benefits, and incurred emotional upset, distress and anxiety. has obtained. 53. Ms. Zamora Bridgers continues to suffer wage loss in new employment that she CAUSES OF ACTION FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation of 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2) 54. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 38 above. 55. Title VII under 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 defines unlawful employment practices and makes it unlawful for an employer: -12-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 13 of 21 (1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment, because of such individual s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 56. Defendant City of Colorado Springs discriminated against Ms. Zamora Bridgers based upon her color/national origin in (a) failing to appoint Ms. Zamora Bridgers as the Interim Finance Director for the employment unit in which she worked, where her qualifications and experience were greater than Ms. Skinner; (b) classify Ms. Zamora Bridgers as hostile to the interests of Colorado Springs and threatening Ms. Zamora Bridgers with disciplinary action or termination; (c) removing and stripping from Ms. Zamora Bridgers job duties and responsibilities; (d) failing to hire Ms. Zamora Bridgers for the airport job for which she applied where she was imminently qualified to perform job duties and responsibilities; (e) creating a hostile working environment for Ms. Zamora Bridgers, including repeated threats of actions directed against her; (f) downgrading Ms. Zamora Bridgers job evaluations and placing her on a PIP plan and not allowing the 60 day period to complete the plan before terminating her; (g) terminated Ms. Zamora Bridgers in November 2012. 57. The actions of the Defendant City of Colorado Springs violate the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 and Ms. Zamora Bridgers has been injured as a direct and proximate result of the illegal employment practice by the City of Colorado Springs. -13-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 14 of 21 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation for Retaliation Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3) 58. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 42 above. 59. 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3 makes it illegal for an employer to retaliate against an employee for making charges, testifying, assisting or participating in enforcement proceedings. 60. Ms. Zamora Bridgers participated in enforcement proceedings relating to the claims by Terri Velasquez. She was interviewed as part of a formal internal investigation by the City of Colorado Springs and provided information that was supportive of Ms. Velasquez claims. 61. Additionally, Ms. Zamora Bridgers was listed in Ms. Velasquez charge of discrimination as a person with knowledge and a witness that would be supportive of Ms. Velasquez. Ms. Velasquez made her charge of discrimination shortly after she was terminated from employment in July 2011. 62. Further, Ms. Zamora Bridgers was listed in disclosure statements filed in a federal proceeding as a person with knowledge who would be supportive of Ms. Velasquez charge. This occurred prior to Ms. Zamora Bridgers being terminated on November 15, 2012. 63. Additionally, Ms. Zamora Bridgers made multiple outcries concerning the discriminatory treatment while still an employee. An outcry was made to the Human Resource Department, initially as a verbal outcry. October 2012. 64. Ms. Zamora Bridgers additionally filed a written claim of discrimination in -14-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 15 of 21 65. Shortly after Ms. Zamora Bridgers made her written outcry of discriminatory treatment, she was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan by the Defendant City of Colorado Springs. 66. Within approximately ten days of being interviewed by an outside investigator pursuant to her discrimination complaint that was made internally with the City of Colorado Springs, Ms. Zamora Bridgers was terminated from employment by the City of Colorado Springs. 67. Ms. Zamora Bridgers was subjected to retaliatory, discriminatory treatment in violation of 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3 in the following ways: (a) failing to appoint Ms. Zamora Bridgers as the Interim Finance Director for the employment unit in which she worked, where her qualifications and experience were greater than Ms. Skinner; (b) classify Ms. Zamora Bridgers as hostile to the interests of Colorado Springs and threatening Ms. Zamora Bridgers with disciplinary action or termination; (c) removing and stripping from Ms. Zamora Bridgers job duties and responsibilities; (d) failing to hire Ms. Zamora Bridgers for the airport job for which she applied where she was imminently qualified to perform job duties and responsibilities; (e) creating a hostile working environment for Ms. Zamora Bridgers, including repeated threats of actions directed against her; (f) downgrading Ms. Zamora Bridgers job evaluations and placing her on a PIP plan and not allowing the 60 day period to complete the plan before terminating her; (g) terminated Ms. Zamora Bridgers in November 2012. 68. As a direct and proximate result of the illegal and wrongful retaliation, Plaintiff has suffered the injuries set forth above. -15-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 16 of 21 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation of 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 42 U.S.C. 1983 for Color and National Origin Discrimination) 69. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 53 above. 70. 42 U.S.C. 1981 requires that all persons have the same rights and privileges to contract as white persons. 71. 42 U.S.C. 1983 provides: Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other persons within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.... 72. The City of Colorado Springs violated the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 42 U.S.C. 1983 in its actions directed against Plaintiff Candice Zamora Bridgers in the same manner as described for violation of 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2. 73. Each of the allegations relating to violations of 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 is reincorporated. 1983. 74. The Defendant City of Colorado Springs is a person for purposes of 42 U.S.C. 75. The actions taken against Ms. Zamora Bridgers were taken with the full authority and power of the City of Colorado Springs, and Defendant Skinner was the delegated decision maker together with the Human Resource Director, Defendant Sullivan. -16-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 17 of 21 76. The actions of Defendants Skinner and Sullivan were the final actions of the City of Colorado Springs, which actions were authorized, approved and ratified. 77. The actions of Defendants Skinner and Sullivan were on behalf of the City of Colorado Springs and were actions taken under color of law, statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, policy or practice. 78. Defendant City of Colorado Springs is liable for the wrongful actions taken against the Plaintiff. 79. As a direct and proximate result of the wrongful actions in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 42 U.S.C. 1983, Defendant City of Colorado has caused Plaintiff the injuries as set forth above in this Complaint. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation of 42 U.S.C. 1981 Through 42 U.S.C. 1983 for Retaliation) 80. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 64 above. 81. Plaintiff, as set forth above in this Complaint, was retaliated against for her support of Ms. Velasquez claims of discriminatory and improper treatment and for her own protected activity in speaking out about her own discriminatory and retaliatory treatment. 82. Plaintiff reincorporates the allegations made in the Second Cause of Action relating to retaliatory treatment under 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3. 83. The actions of the City of Colorado Springs, by and through its delegated appointed individuals, Skinner and Sullivan, are actionable under 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 1983. -17-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 18 of 21 84. As a direct and proximate result of the retaliatory action directed against Plaintiff, Plaintiff has been injured as set forth above in this Complaint. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Liability of Skinner and Sullivan for National Origin/Color Discrimination Under 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 42 U.S.C. 1983) 85. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 69 above. 86. Defendants Sullivan and Skinner violated Plaintiff s rights under the federal Constitution of equal protection under the law by their actions and treatment of her as more fully set forth above in the Complaint. 87. Defendants Skinner and Sullivan purposely, intentionally, recklessly and wantonly targeted Plaintiff for different treatment than afforded white employees, as more fully set forth in the First Cause of Action and specifically targeted her for termination and removal from her position. 88. Further, these Defendants failed to afford Ms. Zamora Bridgers the 60-day period under the Performance Improvement Plan and terminated her before the 60-day period had lapsed. 89. These Defendants actions were taken under color of law, statute, rule, regulation, custom, practice and usage. Each of the Defendants is personally liable for the injuries caused Plaintiff, given that these Defendants worked in joint concert with one another in causing injuries to the Plaintiff. 90. As a direct and proximate result of the wrongful conduct of these Defendants, Plaintiff has been injured as set forth above. -18-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 19 of 21 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Claim for Retaliation Against Sullivan and Skinner for Retaliation under 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 42 U.S.C. 1983) 91. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 75 above. 92. Defendants Skinner and Sullivan retaliated against the Plaintiff for making claims of discriminatory conduct, as more fully set forth above. Defendants acted in concert with one another to target the Plaintiff and acted in retaliatory fashion. 93. The final act of retaliation directed against Plaintiff was the termination of Plaintiff from employment, which facts are more fully set forth above in this Complaint. 94. The retaliation occurred quickly after Plaintiff filed a written complaint of discrimination and then was interviewed by an outside investigator concerning that complaint. 95. Prior acts of retaliation occurred during calendar year 2011 and 2012. 96. Defendants actions in joint concert makes them equally responsible and liable for actions taken in joint concert. 97. The actions of the Defendants violated Plaintiff s constitutional rights under the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution by depriving Plaintiff of the equal opportunity to make complaints of wrongful conduct of a discriminatory nature. 98. As a direct consequence of Defendants illegal actions, Plaintiff has been injured as set forth above in this Complaint. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation of the State Public Policy and Wrongful Discharge) 99. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 83 above. -19-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 20 of 21 100. The City of Colorado Springs, Skinner and Sullivan are all liable to the Plaintiff for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. 101. The public policy of the State of Colorado is to permit and allow individuals to complain and seek remediation from discriminatory acts. The City of Colorado Springs, itself, maintains a non-retaliation policy within personnel policy provisions. 102. Defendants City of Colorado Springs, Skinner and Sullivan violated the public policy in the termination of Ms. Zamora Bridgers by retaliating against Ms. Zamora Bridgers for both providing support for the complaints of Terri Velasquez and then subsequently retaliating when Ms. Zamora Bridgers made claims of discriminatory treatment. 103. These Defendants are liable to the Plaintiff in tort for wrongful discharge in taking Ms. Zamora Bridgers employment in violation of public policy of the State of Colorado. REQUEST FOR RELIEF Plaintiff requests that the Court enter the following relief: 1. Enter judgment for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants on the various claims; 2. Award Plaintiff back pay and benefits that have been lost; 3. Award Plaintiff future pay loss or benefit loss, or alternatively provide equitable relief in the form of reinstatement to a position with the City of Colorado Springs; 4. Award Plaintiff compensatory damages for her emotional upset, distress, anxiety, loss of work time, or any other damages proven at trial. 5. Award Plaintiff attorneys fees and costs as provided by statute; -20-
Case 1:14-cv-01483-RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 21 of 21 6. Award Plaintiff punitive damages against the individual Defendants for her federal claims that are directed against those individuals. Plaintiff is not seeking punitive damages against the individuals for state claims. 7. Award interest from the earliest possible date. 8. Award such other relief that is just and proper. 9. Plaintiff requests a trial by jury on all claims. th Respectfully submitted this 27 day of May, 2014. FINGER & NEWCOMB, P.C. Plaintiff s address: s/william S. Finger William S. Finger, #7224 Andrew M. Newcomb, #37032 29025 Upper Bear Creek Road P.O. Box 1477 Evergreen, CO 80437-1477 Telephone: 303-674-6955 Facsimile: 303-674-6684 E-mail: bill@fn-pc.com 455 A Street Penrose, CO 81240-21-