IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11th

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR 

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA 

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

 CASE NO. 2020-004719-CA 30 

ROBERT WILLIAMS, 

 Plaintiff, 

 

vs. 

SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE COUNTY, 

FLORIDA, 

 

 Defendant. 

_____________________________________/ 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND 

NOTICE OF DESIGNATION OF EMAIL ADDRESSESS 

IN COMPLIANCE WITH FLORIDA RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.516 

 Notice is given that Cristina Rivera Correa, Esq. and Christopher J. La Piano, 

Esq., hereby appear as counsel for Defendant, The School Board of Miami-Dade 

County, Florida. In accordance with Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.080 and Florida 

Rules of Judicial Administration 2.516, the undersigned hereby designate the following 

primary and secondary electronic email addresses in the above-styled cause and 

respectfully request that copies of all orders, pleadings, notices, and other documents 

filed or served in this matter be served at the primary and secondary email addresses 

listed below: 

Primary: cristinarcorrea@dadeschools.net 

Secondary: rosalindward@dadeschools.net 

Primary: cjlapiano @dadeschools.net 

Secondary: courtdocuments@dadeschools.net 

 

Filing # 108819136 E-Filed 06/12/2020 05:42:06 PM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 16 of 68
Williams v. School Board 

Case No. 20-004719-CA 30 

2 

Respectfully submitted, 

Walter J. Harvey, School Board Attorney 

The School Board of Miami-Dade County, FL 

1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 430 

Miami, Florida 33132 

Telephone (305) 995-1304 

Facsimile (305) 995-1412 

By: /s/ Cristina Rivera Correa 

Cristina Rivera Correa, Esq. 

Assistant School Board Attorney 

Florida Bar No. 78391 

cristinarcorrea@dadeschools.net 

rosalindward@dadeschools.net 

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq. 

Assistant School Board Attorney 

Florida Bar No. 0059157 

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net 

courtdocuments@dadeschools.net 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was filed with 

The Florida Court’s E-Filing Portal on June 12, 2020, which will provide electronic 

service upon: Robert Williams, robwilliams1655@yahoo.com, 1776 NW 77th Street, 

Miami, FL 33147. 

/s/ Cristina Rivera Correa 

 Cristina Rivera Correa, Esq. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 17 of 68
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE 

COUNTY, FLORIDA

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

CASE NO. 20-04719 CA 30

ROBERT WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE

COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Defendant.

____________________________________/

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER AND DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

Defendant, The School Board of Miami-Dade County, Florida (“Defendant” and 

“School Board”), by and through the undersigned counsel and pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 

1.100 and 1.140, hereby files its Answer and Defenses to Plaintiff’s Complaint (the 

“Complaint”). In support thereof, Defendant states the following:

1. Defendant admits only that this purports to be an action brought pursuant 

to the FCRA and Defendant denies that any unlawful actions or omissions occurred 

entitling Plaintiff to any relief. 

“JURISDICTION AND VENUE”

2. Admitted.

3. Defendant admits only that venue is proper but expressly denies that any 

actions occurred that would entitle Plaintiff to relief. 

Filing # 109303381 E-Filed 06/23/2020 09:24:15 PM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 18 of 68
2

“PARTIES”

4. Admitted.

5. Admitted.

6. Admitted. 

7. Denied.

8. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

“FACTS”

9. Admitted.

10. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

11. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

12. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

13. Admitted. 

14. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

15. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

16. Admitted.

17. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 19 of 68
3

18. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

19. Denied.

20. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

21. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

22. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

23. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

24. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

25. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

26. Denied.

27. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

28. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

29. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 20 of 68
4

30. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

31. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

32. Admitted.

33. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

34. Denied.

35. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

36. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

37. Denied.

38. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

39. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

40. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

41. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

42. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 21 of 68
5

43. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

44. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

45. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

46. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

47. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

48. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

49. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

50. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

51. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

52. Denied.

53. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

54. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 22 of 68
6

55. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

56. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

57. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

58. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

59. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

60. Denied.

61. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

62. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

63. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

64. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

65. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

66. Denied.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 23 of 68
7

67. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

68. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

69. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

70. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

71. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

72. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

73. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

“COUNT ONE

Florida Statute § 760.10(1)(a)

Unlawful Discrimination Based on Race”

74. Defendant re-alleges and reaffirms its responses to paragraphs 1 through 

73 of Plaintiff’s Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.

75. Denied.

76. Denied.

77. Denied. 

78. Denied.

79. Denied.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 24 of 68
8

80. Denied.

“COUNT TWO

Florida Statute § 760.10(7)

Unlawful Retaliation”

81. Defendant re-alleges and reaffirms its responses to paragraphs 1 through 

80 of Plaintiff’s Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.

82. Denied.

83. Denied.

84. Denied.

85. Denied.

86. Denied.

87. Denied.

“PRAYER FOR RELIEF”

88. Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief as stated in the Prayer 

for Relief paragraph of the Plaintiff’s Complaint, including subsections A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 

and H, therein. 

“JURY DEMAND”

Defendant admits that Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.

DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

In further responding to Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant asserts the following 

defenses and affirmative defenses, which may be supplemented and/or amended as 

discovery unfolds. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 25 of 68
9

1. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a cause of action. 

2. Plaintiff’s claims are banned because he did not file his Complaint within the 

90 day period as set out by the Right to Sue Letter’s issued by the EEOC.

3. All actions taken with regard to Plaintiff’s employment were based on 

legitimate business reasons unrelated to Plaintiff’s alleged exercise of statutorily 

protected activity.

4. All actions taken with regard to Plaintiff’s employment were based on 

legitimate business reasons unrelated to Plaintiff’s alleged race and/or alleged retaliation. 

5. All actions taken with regard to Plaintiff’s employment were for good cause 

and taken in good faith.

6. Based on information and belief, any recovery by Plaintiff must be reduced, 

in whole or in part, because she failed or refused to take reasonable efforts to mitigate 

his damages.

7. Defendant, reserves the right to assert a mixed motive defense because, 

even if Plaintiff proves that an impermissible intent was a motivating factor in the 

challenged employment decision(s), the adverse employment decision(s) at issue would 

have been made anyway in the absence of any impermissible intent.

8. Defendant states that as a political subdivision of the State of Florida, 

Defendant is entitled to sovereign immunity under Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. 

Consequently, Plaintiff’s claims are limited to the provisions, statutory caps, and 

exclusions of Section 768.28, Florida Statues. 

9. Defendant states that the decision/activity of Defendant, a governmental 

entity, complained of by Plaintiff that allegedly led to Plaintiff’s injury/damage was a 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 26 of 68
10

planning level decision/activity on the part of Defendant’s officers and agency, and is 

immune from suit. 

10. Defendant states that neither the School Board nor any of its employees 

engaged in any conduct that proximately caused or contributed to Plaintiff’s alleged 

injuries and damages.

11. To the extent that Plaintiff has failed to timely file his cause of action, it is 

barred.

12. To the extent that Plaintiff failed to exhaust any administrative remedies 

available to him, this Court lacks jurisdiction to hear those claims. 

13. If the School Board is liable to Plaintiff for any monetary relief, which the 

School Board denies, then such amounts must be reduced and set-off by Plaintiff’s interim 

earnings and benefits and by amounts and benefits Plaintiff could have earned through 

the exercise of reasonable diligence.

WHEREFORE Defendant, the School Board of Miami-Dade County, Florida 

respectfully requests that this Court dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice, award 

Defendant its costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in this action, and award any 

such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

 Defendant reserves the right to raise additional general and affirmative 

defenses as discovery progresses. Defendant reserves the right to amend its Answer 

pursuant to Nash v. Wells Fargo Guard Services, Inc., So. 2d 1262, 1264-1265 (Fla. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 27 of 68
11

1996), to contend any damages of which Plaintiff complains were caused and/or 

contributed to by additional non-parties.

Respectfully submitted,

Walter J. Harvey, School Board Attorney

The School Board of Miami-Dade County, FL

1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 430

Miami, Florida 33132

Telephone (305) 995-1304 

Facsimile (305) 995-1412

By: /s/ Cristina Rivera Correa

Cristina Rivera Correa, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

Florida Bar No. 78391

cristinarcorrea@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net 

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

Florida Bar No. 0059157

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net

courtdocuments@dadeschools.net

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing was

filed via E-File and mailed this 22nd day of June 2020, to Robert Williams, 1776 NW 77th

St., Miami, FL 33147. 

By: /s/ Christopher J. La Piano

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 28 of 68
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FLORIDA

GENERAL DIVISION

ROBERT WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Case Number: 20-04719 CA30

SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE

COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Defendant.

PLAINTIFF, ROBERT WILLIAMS’ MOTION FOR A

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Plaintiff, Robert Williams, files this motion for a Case Management Conference supported by the

following:

1. The need to schedule discovery.

2. The defendant conducted discovery regarding claims made in complaint in November

2017 during an internal investigation.

3. The defendant conducted discovery regarding claims made in complaint in January 2018

during an EEOC investigation.

4. The defendant conducted discovery regarding claims made in complaint in April 2018

during an internal investigation.

5. Although the defendant provided defenses in those investigative reports, the answer

submitted to this court was a template response that was not specific to this complaint. 

6. Pursue the possibility of settlement.

7. This motion is being made in good faith and with the purpose of streamlining discovery. 

Filing # 110041469 E-Filed 07/10/2020 04:08:36 AM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 29 of 68
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY that on this 10th day of July 2020, this document is being served on those on the

attached service list by electronic service via the Florida Court E-Filing Portal in compliance

with Fla. Admin Order No. 13-49.

Robert Williams

Plaintiff

1776 N.W. 77t Street

Miami, FL 33147

Phone: (561) 245-1409

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 30 of 68
SERVICE LIST

Cristina Rivera Correa, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

cristinarcorrea@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net

courtdocuments@dadeschools.net

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 31 of 68
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11th

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

CASE NO. 2020-004719-CA 30

ROBERT WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE COUNTY,

FLORIDA, 

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND 

NOTICE OF DESIGNATION OF EMAIL ADDRESSES

IN COMPLIANCE WITH FLORIDA RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.516

Notice is given that Michele L. Jones, Esq., hereby appears as counsel for 

Defendant, The School Board of Miami-Dade County, Florida. In accordance with 

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.080 and Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 

2.516, the undersigned hereby designates the following primary and secondary 

electronic email addresses in the above-styled cause and respectfully requests that 

copies of all orders, pleadings, notices, and other documents filed or served in this 

matter be served at the primary and secondary email addresses listed below: 

Primary: mljones@dadeschools.net 

Secondary: rosalindward@dadeschools.net 

Filing # 110512318 E-Filed 07/20/2020 05:32:20 PM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 32 of 68
Williams v. School Board 

Case No. 2020-004719-CA 30

2

Respectfully submitted,

Walter J. Harvey, School Board Attorney

The School Board of Miami-Dade County, FL

1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 430

Miami, Florida 33132

Telephone (305) 995-1304 

Facsimile (305) 995-1412

By: /s/ Michele L. Jones 

Michele L. Jones, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

Florida Bar No. 86008

mljones@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net 

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

Florida Bar No. 0059157

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net

courtdocuments@dadeschools.net

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was filed with 

The Florida Court’s E-Filing Portal on July 20, 2020, which will provide electronic 

service upon: Robert Williams, robwilliams1655@yahoo.com, 1776 NW 77th Street, 

Miami, FL 33147.

/s/ Michele L. Jones

Michele L. Jones, Esq.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 33 of 68
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FLORIDA

GENERAL DIVISION

ROBERT WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Case Number: 20-04719 CA30

SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE

COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Defendant.

NOTICE OF HEARING

YOU ARE HEARBY NOTIFIED that a hearing has been set for Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at

8:30 AM, before the Honorable Reemberto Diaz, via Zoom. The motion, PLAINTIFF, ROBERT

WILLIAMS MOTION FOR A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is to be heard.

Filing # 110542794 E-Filed 07/21/2020 11:33:48 AM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 34 of 68
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY that on this 10th day of July 2020, this document is being served on those on the

attached service list by electronic service via the Florida Court E-Filing Portal in compliance

with Fla. Admin Order No. 13-49.

Robert Williams

Plaintiff

1776 N.W. 77t Street

Miami, FL 33147

Phone: (561) 245-1409

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 35 of 68
SERVICE LIST

Michele L. Jones, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

mljones@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net

courtdocuments@dadeschools.net

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 36 of 68
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FLORIDA

GENERAL DIVISION

ROBERT WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Case Number:

SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE

COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Defendant.

AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff alleges:

1. This action is brought due to violations to provisions of Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”). The plaintiff alleges

that the Defendant, the School Board of Miami Dade County (“Defendant” or “Board”),

subjected Mr. Robert Williams to unlawful race Discrimination and retaliation in violation of

Title VII.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This court has jurisdiction over this action under ss § 26.012 (2)(a).

3. Venue is proper in this circuit under ss § 47.011, because it is where the cause of

action accrued.

1

Filing # 110729709 E-Filed 07/24/2020 07:53:41 AM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 37 of 68
PARTIES

4. Defendant, the School Board of Miami Dade County, is the governing body for

Miami Dade County Public Schools (“District”). Defendant is a cooperate, governmental body

created pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida and located within this judicial district.

5. Defendant is a “person” within the meaning of ss § 760.02(6), and an employer

within the meaning ss § 760.02(7).

6. On January 29, 2018, Williams filed a timely charge alleging discrimination

based on race and retaliation with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”).

7. On August 1, 2018, Williams filed another timely charge alleging retaliation with

the EEOC. A right to sue letter was received for this charge and the charge filed on January 29,

2018 on February 25, 2020.

8. All conditions precedent to the filing of a Title VII suit have been performed or

occurred.

FACTS

Williams’ Employment with the District

9. Williams began working for the School District in October 2011. Between 2011

and 2013, Williams worked as a temporary instructor. In 2015, he began working as a full-time

secondary science teacher.

10. Williams has received positive annual performance reviews throughout his career

with the District. 

11. Before August 30, 2017 and during his career as a full-time teacher, Williams was

never absent or late.

2

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 38 of 68
12. From October 2011 to August 30, 2017, Williams was never the subject of a

personnel investigation or disciplined for any infractions.

13. During the 2015 – 2017 school years, Williams was a teacher at International

Studies Preparatory Academy (“ISPA”), a public school in the District. 

14. Williams was selected as “Teacher of the year” by teachers at ISPA for 2017.

International Studies Preparatory Academy

15. ISPA has had the same administrative staff, excluding Principal Ms. Alina Diaz,

from the 2015 – 2017 school years.

16. During the 2017 – 2018 school year, ISPA’s principal and Assistant principal

were Ms. Alina Diaz and Ms. Felica Diaz respectively. 

17. Several times during the 2017 – 2018 school year Ms. Alina Diaz and Ms. Felicia

Diaz both assisted Williams’ students with submitting assignments electronically to an online

program called OneNote.

18. During the 2016 – 2017 school year another African – American teacher at ISPA,

Rashida Rose, left the school after alleging race discrimination. She was replaced by a nonAfrican-American teacher.

19. During the 2017 – 2018 school year Williams was the only full time African

American teacher left at ISPA, with the rest being either Hispanic or Caucasian. 

20. During the 2017 – 2018 school year there were no more than 9 African American

students enrolled at ISPA with the rest being either Hispanic or Caucasian.

21. Ms. Alina Diaz, informed teachers at the beginning of the 2017-2018 school year,

through email, that they were not to mark students that were late to the first class of the day with

the letter “T”. 

3

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 39 of 68
22. During the 2015 – 2018 school years, Yvonne Fernandez was assigned to work as

a substitute teacher, when a full-time teacher was not in the room classroom. She was never

assigned to work alongside Williams, in his classroom, before November 2, 2017.

23. In a September 22, 2017 email, Ms. Alina Diaz informed teachers at ISPA that in

order to use the facilities, including the cafeteria, teachers must reserve the space in writing and

in advance.

24. According to the District’s Student Code of Conduct, students in violation of

district policy should be referred to the school administration, when necessary. 

25. On or around August 15, 2017, Williams made numerous requests through email

for classroom supplies and was denied. Similar requests for supplies made by the non-African

American teachers were granted. 

Assists African American Student with Race Discrimination Complaint

26. On or about August 15, 2017, Williams was informed by the activities director,

Yasmine Acevedo, that she was assigning an African-American Student (“Victim Child”) to him,

as a student assistant, because “no one else wanted him”.

27. After hearing those words about Victim Child, Williams was devastated because

students and teachers alike were not free from discrimination at ISPA.

28. On or about August 30, 2017, Victim Child expressed to Williams his frustrations

about how he was being treated as a black student at the school.

29. On August 30, 2017 at 10:53 am, Williams assisted Victim Child with making an

8 minute 26 second phone call to the Central Region Office(“CRO”). The phone call was a

complaint about treatment of blacks at ISPA starting with the conversation between Williams

and Yasmin Acevedo on August 15, 2017.

4

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 40 of 68
30. On or around August 2017, Ms. Alina Diaz, at the request of the CRO, contacted

Victim Child and his parents to talk about the concerns made in Williams’ August 30, 2017

complaint.

31. Because the student was assigned to Williams as a student aid and the complaint

was primarily about the comments made by Yasmine Acevedo to Williams on August 15, 2017,

Ms. Alina Diaz was able deduced that Williams made the complaint.

Unlawful Retaliation for Complaining About Unfair Treatment of Blacks at ISPA

32. The Miami Dade County Public Schools Personnel Investigative Manual(“PIM”)

details how District employees should conduct personnel investigations.

33. The PIM states that: “all minor incidents, including alleged ethics violations,

should be handled at the worksite by the principal.”

34. Ms. Alina Diaz never spoke to Williams before sending allegations she made

against him for investigation.

35. On October 10, 2017 in an email, Williams complained to Ms. Alina Diaz about

how she was allowing a parent to harass him with nonstop daily calls and emails.

36. On October 10, 2017 a few hours after his complaint, in an email, Ms. Alina Diaz

informed Williams that she requested a personnel investigation against him.

37. False information was used in the October 10, 2017 investigation, against

Williams, to draw investigative conclusions.

38. Ms. Alina Diaz conducted the personnel investigation from October 10, 2017 by

herself. She also, allegedly, selected minor witnesses for interview.

5

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 41 of 68
39. On or around October 26, 2017, Williams was reprimanded through email, by Ms.

Alina Diaz, for marking a student late to the first class of the day with a “T” in the gradebook

and had the “T” removed.

40. On or around October 25, 2017, math teacher Mr. Jose Courel also marked a

student late with a “T” in the gradebook. He was not reprimanded, records show his “T”

remained in the gradebook weeks later. 

41. On or about November 2, 2017, Williams submitted a Civil Rights complaint to

the District’s Civil Rights office for discrimination and retaliation against Ms. Alina Diaz and

Felicia Diaz.

42. On or November 6, 2017, about 1 school day after Williams’ November 2, 2017

complaint to District’s Civil Rights Office, Ms. Yvonne Fernandez was placed in Williams’

classroom all day every day to report his actions back to Ms. Alina Diaz.

43. On or about November 15, 2017, Williams emailed Ms. Alina Diaz requesting

permission to leave campus to attend his interview with the District’s Civil Rights Office

regarding the complaint that he submitted against her and Ms. Felicia Diaz.

44. On or about November 17, 2017, 1 day after permission was granted for Williams

to interview with the Districts Civil Rights Office, school administrators from ISPA sent a false

complaint to the Department of Children and Families (DCF). The allegations were that

Williams was abusing students at ISPA.

45. DCF investigated and determined the allegations made by the administration at

ISPA were unsubstituted. 

6

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 42 of 68
46. On or about November 17, 2017, in an email, Williams was told by Ms. Felicia

Diaz that the cafeteria that he reserved with Ms. Alina Diaz was no longer available. The

cafeteria was given to a white teacher named Ms. Patricia Keller.

47. On or about November 28, 2017, Williams emailed Ms. Alina Diaz to request that

she discipline a student that called another student a nigger.

48. On or about November 28, 2017, in an email sent 18 minutes after Williams sent

his email about the student that called the other student a nigger, Ms. Alina Diaz requested to

meet with him. In the meeting she informed Williams that she requested another personnel

investigation against him.

49. On or about November 28, 2017, Williams was informed by students that Ms.

Alina Diaz and Ms. Felicia Diaz were calling them down to the office to start personnel

investigations against him. The students were promised higher grades if they provided

statements.

50. The students that allegedly provided statements in the personnel investigations

against Williams, in fact, received higher grades for the 3

rd quarter of the 2017-2018 school year.

51. The District does not have a database assessable to teachers that contains

confidential information of other staff members or information about degrees/credentials.

52. False information was used in the November 21, 2017 investigation against

Williams to draw investigative conclusions.

53. The only adults at ISPA that supplied information during the personnel

investigation from November 21, 2017 were Alina Diaz and/or Felica Diaz. They also, allegedly,

selected minor witnesses for interview.

7

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 43 of 68
54. On or about November 28, 2017, Williams emailed the School Board of Miami

Dade County and the Central Region Office (CRO) Superintendent, John Pace, requesting relief

from the retaliation.

55. 1 day after Williams emailed the Board and the CRO superintendent, On or about

November 30, 2017, Williams was informed by Ms. Alina Diaz that she requested another

personnel investigation against him.

56. On or about December 4, 2017, Williams asked the United Teachers Dade Union

(“UTD”) rep for help with the discrimination and retaliation, that same day Alina Diaz was

removed from directly investigating the false personnel investigations against him.

57. 1 day later in a December 5, 2017 email, Williams was reprimanded by Ms. Alina

Diaz for more false allegations.

58. On December 19, 2017, Williams was told by Alina Diaz that she was requesting

another personnel investigation against him. He emailed the District’s civil rights office the same

day to complain about the unlawful retaliation.

59. On or about December 5, 2017, Williams emailed all of his students and told them

that tutoring was canceled. That email was forwarded to Ms. Alina Diaz on or about the same

day.

60. False information was used in the December 19, 2017 investigation, against

Williams, to draw investigative conclusions.

61. The only adults at ISPA that supplied information for the December 19, 2017

personnel investigation were Alina Diaz and/or Felica Diaz. They also, allegedly, selected minor

witnesses for interview.

8

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 44 of 68
62. On or about January 8, 2018, Williams was told by Ms. Felicia Diaz that an

investigator from DCF was there to interview him about the allegations made on November 17,

2017. Williams emailed the District’s Civil Rights office the same day to complain about the

retaliatory DCF investigation.

63. 1 day after his January 8, 2018 email to the District’s Civil Rights Office on or

about January 10, 2018, Williams was involuntarily transferred to the CRO for complaining

about the unlawful retaliation.

64. Every day that Williams was assigned to the CRO he was required to sit in an

empty conference room for about 8 hours a day.

65. On or about January 11, 2018, Williams was informed by the CRO

Superintendent, John Pace, that Ms. Alina Diaz requested another personnel investigation against

him.

66. False information was used in the January 11, 2018 investigation, against

Williams, to draw investigative conclusions.

67. The only adults at ISPA that supplied information for the January 11, 2018

personnel investigation were Alina Diaz and/or Felica Diaz. They also, allegedly, selected minor

witnesses for interview.

68. Beginning January 11, 2018, Williams sat in an empty conference room at the

CRO until it became unbearable and he became ill. He was experiencing humiliation, anxiety,

weight gain, and relationship strain due to the retaliation. 

69. Around about mid-March Williams continued to call in sick and never returned to

the conference room at the CRO.

9

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 45 of 68
70. On or about April 19, 2018, upon receiving the personnel investigative reports

against him, Williams realized that Ms. Alina Diaz and Ms. Felicia Diaz had knowingly

submitted false information for multiple investigations. Because they were the only adults at

ISPA that supplied information for the personnel investigations, he faxed a new complaint to the

District’s Civil Rights Office.

71. On or about April 30, 2018, perplexed that the District’s Civil Rights Office did

nothing to stop the discrimination and retaliation, Williams emailed the School Board of Miami

Dade County and the CRO Superintendent, John Pace.

72. On or about June 2018, upon recommendation from Alina Diaz, Williams was

notified that his employment would be terminated for the 2018-2019 school year and that the

Florida Department of Education would be notified of the personnel investigations.

73. Williams was replaced by a Hispanic teacher for the 2018-2019 school year.

COUNT ONE

Title VII, 42 U.S. Code § 2000e–2(a)

Unlawful Discrimination Based on Race

74. The plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation

75. Defendant did not supply African – American teacher with requested classroom

supplies.

76. Defendant allowed non-African – American teachers use the facilities reserved by

African American teachers.

77. Defendant allowed students to make racially derogatory terms, offensive to

African Americans, with impunity.

78. Defendant’s purported reason for reason for terminating Williams are pretext for

unlawful race discrimination.

10

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 46 of 68
79. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful discrimination, Williams incurred damages

including, but not limited to, lost income.

80. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful discrimination, Williams suffered emotional

distress, including loss of enjoyment of life, and damage to his professional reputation. 

COUNT TWO

Title VII, 42 U.S. Code § 2000e-3(a)

Unlawful Retaliation

81. The plaintiff repeats and re-alleges every allegation

82. Williams engaged in multiple protected activities including assisting Victim

Student with making the discrimination complaint to the CRO.

83. Defendant allowed Alina Diaz and Felica Diaz, both of which Williams

complained on to the District’s Civil Rights Office, knowingly provide false information during

personnel investigations against him. 

84. Defendant terminated Williams’ employment based on information, proven to be

false, during their own Civil Rights investigation.

85. Defendant knowingly submitted false information to the Florida Department of

Education, causing them to sanction Williams’ teaching certificate. 

86. Defendant’s purported reason for reason for terminating Williams are pretext for

unlawful retaliation. 

87. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful retaliation, Williams suffered emotional

distress, including loss of enjoyment of life, and damage to his professional reputation. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

88. The plaintiff prays that the Court grant the following relief:

11

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 47 of 68
(a) removal of all negative information in Williams’ personnel file as a result of the

discrimination and retaliation alleged in this complaint;

(b) award all appropriate monetary relief, including back pay where applicable, to

Williams in an amount to be determined at trial to make him whole for any lost he suffered as a

result of discrimination and retaliation as alleged in this complaint;

(c) award Williams any prejudgment interest on the amount of lost wages and benefits

determined to be due;

(d) award compensatory damages to Williams to fully compensate him for the pain and

suffering cases by the Miami Dade County School Board’s discrimination and retaliation alleged

in this complaint, pursuant to and within the statutory limitations of Section 102 of the Civil

Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S. Code § 1981a;

(e) order Defendant to reinstate Williams is an appropriate position and title with the

District given Williams’ experience;

(f) enjoin Defendant from further discrimination and retaliation against Williams

(g) order any relief necessary to make Williams whole

(h) award plaintiff’s attorney’s fees, as applicable

JURY DEMAND

The plaintiff demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable pursuant to Rule 38 of the

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and Section 760.11(5) of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992.

12

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 48 of 68
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY that on this 24th day of July 2020, this document is being served on those on the

attached service list by electronic service via the Florida Court E-Filing Portal in compliance

with Fla. Admin Order No. 13-49.

Robert Williams

Plaintiff

1776 N.W. 77t Street

Miami, FL 33147

Phone: (561) 245-1409

13

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 49 of 68
SERVICE LIST

Michele L. Jones, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

mljones@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net

courtdocuments@dadeschools.net

14

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 50 of 68
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE 

COUNTY, FLORIDA

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

CASE NO. 20-04719 CA 30

ROBERT WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE

COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Defendant.

____________________________________/

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER AND DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF’S 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

Defendant, The School Board of Miami-Dade County, Florida (“Defendant” and 

“School Board”), by and through the undersigned counsel and pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 

1.100 and 1.140, hereby files its Answer and Defenses to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint 

(the “Complaint”). In support thereof, Defendant states the following:

1. Defendant admits only that this purports to be an action brought pursuant 

to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. and Defendant denies 

that any unlawful actions or omissions occurred entitling Plaintiff to any relief. 

“JURISDICTION AND VENUE”

2. Admitted.

3. Defendant admits only that venue is proper but expressly denies that any 

actions occurred that would entitle Plaintiff to relief. 

Filing # 111204698 E-Filed 08/03/2020 06:09:29 PM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 51 of 68
2

“PARTIES”

4. Admitted.

5. Admitted.

6. Admitted. 

7. Denied.

8. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

“FACTS”

“Williams’ Employment with the District”

9. Admitted.

10. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

11. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

12. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

13. Admitted. 

14. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

“International Studies Preparatory Academy”

15. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

16. Admitted.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 52 of 68
3

17. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

18. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

19. Denied.

20. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

21. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

22. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

23. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

24. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

25. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

“Assists African American Student with Race Discrimination Complaint”

26. Denied.

27. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

28. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 53 of 68
4

29. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

30. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

31. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

“Unlawful Retaliation for Complaining About Unfair Treatment of Blacks at ISPA”

32. Admitted.

33. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

34. Denied.

35. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

36. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

37. Denied.

38. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

39. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

40. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 54 of 68
5

41. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

42. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

43. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

44. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

45. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

46. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

47. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

48. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

49. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

50. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

51. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

52. Denied.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 55 of 68
6

53. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

54. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

55. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

56. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

57. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

58. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

59. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

60. Denied.

61. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

62. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

63. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

64. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 56 of 68
7

65. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

66. Denied.

67. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

68. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

69. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

70. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

71. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

72. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

73. Defendant is presently without knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in this paragraph, therefore they are denied. 

“COUNT ONE

Title VII, 42 U.S. Code §2000e-2(a) 

Unlawful Discrimination Based on Race”

74. Defendant re-alleges and reaffirms its responses to paragraphs 1 through 

73 of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth 

herein.

75. Denied.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 57 of 68
8

76. Denied.

77. Denied. 

78. Denied.

79. Denied.

80. Denied.

“COUNT TWO

Title VII, 42 U.S. Code § 2000e-3(a)

Unlawful Retaliation”

81. Defendant re-alleges and reaffirms its responses to paragraphs 1 through 

80 of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth 

herein.

82. Denied.

83. Denied.

84. Denied.

85. Denied.

86. Denied.

87. Denied.

“PRAYER FOR RELIEF”

88. Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief as stated in the Prayer 

for Relief paragraph of the Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, including subsections A, B, C, 

D, E, F, G, and H, therein. 

“JURY DEMAND”

Defendant admits that Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 58 of 68
9

DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

In further responding to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, Defendant asserts the 

following defenses and affirmative defenses, which may be supplemented and/or 

amended as discovery unfolds. 

1. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint fails to state a cause of action. 

2. Plaintiff’s claims are banned because he did not file his Amended Complaint 

within the 90 day period as set out by the Right to Sue Letter’s issued by the EEOC.

3. All actions taken with regard to Plaintiff’s employment were based on 

legitimate business reasons unrelated to Plaintiff’s alleged exercise of statutorily 

protected activity.

4. All actions taken with regard to Plaintiff’s employment were based on 

legitimate business reasons unrelated to Plaintiff’s alleged race and/or alleged retaliation. 

5. All actions taken with regard to Plaintiff’s employment were for good cause 

and taken in good faith.

6. Based on information and belief, any recovery by Plaintiff must be reduced, 

in whole or in part, because he failed or refused to take reasonable efforts to mitigate his

damages.

7. Defendant, reserves the right to assert a mixed motive defense because, 

even if Plaintiff proves that an impermissible intent was a motivating factor in the 

challenged employment decision(s), the adverse employment decision(s) at issue would 

have been made anyway in the absence of any impermissible intent.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 59 of 68
10

8. Defendant states that as a political subdivision of the State of Florida, 

Defendant is entitled to sovereign immunity under Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. 

Consequently, Plaintiff’s claims are limited to the provisions, statutory caps, and 

exclusions of Section 768.28, Florida Statues. 

9. Defendant states that the decision/activity of Defendant, a governmental 

entity, complained of by Plaintiff that allegedly led to Plaintiff’s injury/damage was a 

planning level decision/activity on the part of Defendant’s officers and agency, and is 

immune from suit. 

10. Defendant states that neither the School Board nor any of its employees 

engaged in any conduct that proximately caused or contributed to Plaintiff’s alleged 

injuries and damages.

11. To the extent that Plaintiff has failed to timely file his cause of action, it is 

barred.

12. To the extent that Plaintiff failed to exhaust any administrative remedies

available to him, this Court lacks jurisdiction to hear those claims. 

13. If the School Board is liable to Plaintiff for any monetary relief, which the 

School Board denies, then such amounts must be reduced and set-off by Plaintiff’s interim 

earnings and benefits and by amounts and benefits Plaintiff could have earned through 

the exercise of reasonable diligence.

WHEREFORE Defendant, the School Board of Miami-Dade County, Florida 

respectfully requests that this Court dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint with prejudice, 

award Defendant its costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in this action, and 

award any such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 60 of 68
11

RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

 Defendant reserves the right to raise additional general and affirmative 

defenses as discovery progresses. Defendant reserves the right to amend its Answer 

pursuant to Nash v. Wells Fargo Guard Services, Inc., So. 2d 1262, 1264-1265 (Fla. 

1996), to contend any damages of which Plaintiff complains were caused and/or 

contributed to by additional non-parties.

Respectfully submitted,

Walter J. Harvey, School Board Attorney

The School Board of Miami-Dade County, FL

1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 430

Miami, Florida 33132

Telephone (305) 995-1304 

Facsimile (305) 995-1412

By: /s/ Christopher J. La Piano

Michele L. Jones, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

Florida Bar No. 86008

mljones@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net 

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Assistant School Board Attorney

Florida Bar No. 0059157

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net

courtdocuments@dadeschools.net

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 61 of 68
12

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing was

filed via E-File and E-mailed this 3

rd day of August 2020 , to Robert Williams, 1776 NW 

77th St., Miami, FL 33147. 

By: /s/ Christopher J. La Piano

Christopher J. La Piano, Esq.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 62 of 68
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR 

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION

CASE NO.:

SECTION: 

UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CAUSE

FOR JURY TRIAL, MEDIATION, AND 

PRE-TRIAL INSTRUCTIONS

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

Defendant(s)

______________________________________/

THIS CAUSE is hereby set for jury trial before the undersigned Judge at the Dade 

County Courthouse, 73 West Flagler Street, Miami, Florida 33130, Room _________ for the 

____ week period commencing:

_______________________________, or as soon thereafter as the same may be heard.

ALL ATTORNEYS, pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.200., are directed to appear before the 

undersigned Judge at the Dade County Courthouse for:

Calendar Call on _____________________.

SUBJECT TO PUBLIC HEALTH REQUIREMENTS AND COURT SAFETY 

GUIDELINES DUE TO COVID-19. CHECK JUDICIAL WEBPAGE FOR TRIAL 

INSTRUCTIONS.

All attorneys appearing at the Calendar Call shall be thoroughly familiar with the cause and be 

prepared to consider and determine such matters as are set forth in Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.200(b). 

Failure to appear as directed or to otherwise strictly comply with the terms of this Order may 

result in sanctions, including, but not limited to, the dismissal of the action, striking of pleadings, 

limiting of proof, striking a witness or such other actions as the Court may deem proper. 

It is further Ordered and Adjudged as follows:

1. The parties shall do all things necessary to assure availability of their

witnesses for the entire trial period or to otherwise preserve their testimony for trial as 

provided by Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.300 and 1.460. See Fla. R. 

Jud. Adm. 2.085.

2. At least ninety (90) days prior to the first day of the trial period set forth

herein, counsel for each party shall file a list of the proper names and addresses of all

2020-004719-CA-01 ROBERT WILLIAMS CA30 SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI DADE COUNTY FLORIDA 1202 3

02-01-2021 01-27-2021 at 1:30 PM

Filing # 111243284 E-Filed 08/04/2020 11:52:15 AM Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 63 of 68
3. At least sixty (60) days prior to the first day of the trial period set forth herein,

counsel for each party shall file a list of the proper names and addresses of all expert witnesses

retained by the parties who are expected to testify at the trial of this cause. The parties shall

also list the specialty of each expert, what element of the case the expert will express opinions on 

(standard of care, causation, damages, etc.), and provide all parties a copy of the experts’ 

report(s), if applicable, and/or provide a short summary of the testimony expected from each

expert pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P.1.280(b)(5). Each party is limited to one expert per specialty.

4. Upon receipt of opposing counsel’s expert witness disclosure, each party shall

have fifteen (15) days to list the proper names of additional rebuttal experts or impeachment

witnesses. The parties shall follow the instructions in paragraph 3 with regards to the

information accompanying the listing of additional experts retained by the parties.

5. At the time of the Calendar Call, if necessary, counsel for each party will file any

objections to the authenticity of any records or evidence produced during discovery that are 

expected to be introduced into evidence so as to put all parties on notice of the need for a records

custodian witness. Failure to timely file such objection will be deemed as a waiver of any

objection to authenticity. All other substantive objections are preserved.

6. All compulsory medical evaluations pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.360 shall be

completed at least forty-five (45) days prior to the first day of the trial period set forth herein. 

7. At least thirty (30) days prior to the first day of the trial period set forth herein,

counsel for each party shall file a list of all exhibits intended to be introduced as evidence at trial

and make these exhibits available to opposing counsel for examination and inspection, including

the initialing of the exhibits no later than five (5) days prior to the first day of the trial period.

8. Daubert motions shall be filed thirty (30) days prior to the first day of the trial

period. Hearing on these motions shall be set NOT LATER THAN fifteen (15) days prior to

the first day of the trial period. At the time of the Calendar Call, each party shall make known to

opposing counsel and the court all substantive motions, including all motions in limine, that still

need to be ruled upon prior to trial. Failure to do so may be deemed an abandonment of any

pending motion(s). If any Daubert motion has been timely filed and not heard, it shall be

brought to the attention of the Court at Calendar Call.

9. Discovery shall be concluded at least fifteen (15) days prior to the first day of the

trial period set forth herein. Any further discovery must be conducted by the written stipulation

of all parties or leave of the Court.

10. Ten (10) days prior to the first day of the trial period, the parties shall file their

page-line designation for depositions that they intend to read or play at trial; the opposing party 

shall have five (5) days thereafter to file objections and/or counter-designations. 

witnesses who are expected to testify in this cause, including all “hybrid” witnesses who may be 

considered a fact witness and also give expert testimony.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 64 of 68
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order 

to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the 

provision of certain assistance. Please contact Aliean Simpkins, the Eleventh 

Judicial Circuit Court’s ADA Coordinator, Lawson E. Thomas Courthouse 

Center, 175 NW 1st Ave., Suite 2400, Miami, FL 33128, Telephone (305) 

349-7175; TDD (305) 349-7174, Fax (305) 349-7355, Email:

ADA@jud11.flcourts.org at least seven (7) days before your scheduled court

appearance, or immediately upon receiving this notification if the time before

the scheduled appearance is less than seven (7) days; if you are hearing or

voice impaired, call 711.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at Miami-Dade County, Florida, on this

___________________________.

__________________________________________

CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE

11. Mediation shall have been completed prior to the Calendar Call to either resolve

the case or narrow the issues. The parties shall immediately notify the Court in the event of 

settlement and submit a Stipulation and Order of Dismissal. As well, the parties shall advise the 

Court of the cancellation of any pending hearings. The parties are ordered to mediate this cause 

pursuant to attached exhibit which is incorporated in this order.

12. The parties are directed to exchange proposed jury instructions and verdict forms

at the time of the Calendar Call. At least three (3) days before commencement of the trial 

period the parties shall agree on as many jury instructions as possible and be prepared to submit 

the agreed instructions to the court as well as designate to the court the proposed instructions in 

dispute.

13. Should the parties believe that a different schedule is required for the efficient

administration of this matter, they are encouraged to meet and develop a joint stipulated 

order and/or set a case management conference pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.200. If parties 

expect that the case will require a pretrial conference, they should request and schedule 

same sufficiently in advance of trial to permit same to be scheduled.

14. Failure to list a witness or exhibit pursuant to this order may result in the exclusion

of that witness or exhibit from trial.

15. Should this matter be continued or not reached during the trial docket set forth

herein, each time limitation and provision contained herein shall apply to the new trial date.

16. All time periods herein refer to calendar days.

4th day of August, 2020 Reemberto Diaz / V E 2020-004719-CA-01 08-04-2020 11:40 AM 2020-004719-CA-01 08-04-2020 11:40 AM Reemberto Diaz signed at Judge's direction

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 65 of 68
Copies Furnished to: 

cjlapiano@dadeschools.net

laynetperez@dadeschools.net

mljones@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net

cristinarcorrea@dadeschools.net

rosalindward@dadeschools.net

robwilliams1655@yahoo.com

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 66 of 68
EXHIBIT TO TRIAL ORDER:

REFERRAL TO MEDIATION

Pursuant to Chapter 44 of the Florida Statutes and Rules 1.700 – 1.730, Florida Rules of Civil 

Procedure, the above-styled cause is hereby referred to mediation. Mediation is a mandatory but 

non-binding settlement conference, conducted with the assistance of a Mediator. Mediation is 

private, confidential, and privileged from process and discovery. After mediation, the Mediator 

shall file a report in accordance with Rule 1.730, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Selection of Mediator

(1) Within fifteen (15) days of this Order of Referral, the parties may mutually agree upon the

designation of any certified Mediator of their choice. If an agreement is reached, the plaintiff or

petitioner shall, within the time period set forth above, file with the Clerk of the Court, and serve

upon the parties, the agreed-upon Mediator, and the Court a “Notice of Stipulation of Mediator”

which shall identify the name, address, telephone number and email of the Mediator. Upon filing

the “Notice of Stipulation of Mediator,” said Mediator shall be deemed designated to mediate

without further Order of Court.

(2) In the event the parties are unable to agree upon the selection of a mediator within the time

frame set forth above, the plaintiff or petitioner shall, within twenty (20) days of this Order of

Referral, prepare a “Request for Appointment of Mediator” certifying that notwithstanding a good

faith effort to agree, the parties were unsuccessful in so doing and requesting the Mediation

Division provide the next available mediator from the rotating list of Certified Mediators. Said

“Request for Appointment of Mediator” shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court and a copy

emailed to the Mediation Division, MediationDivision@jud11.flcourts.org.

Payment of Mediator’s Fees

(3) Fees for the mediation are to be divided and borne equally by the parties unless:

a. otherwise agreed to by the parties, in writing,

b. otherwise provided by court order; or 

(4) The Mediator shall be compensated at the Mediator’s established hourly rate (unless otherwise 

agreed by the Mediator and parties), with a 2-hour minimum. This minimum 2-hour fee shall be paid 

at least seven (7) days prior to the scheduled mediation, and the balance of the fee, if any, shall be 

paid at the conclusion of the mediation. However, any Mediator selected pursuant to paragraph (2) 

above, from the rotating list of Certified Mediators in the Mediation Division, shall be compensated at 

a rate of $125.00 per hour, unless otherwise agreed to by the Mediator and the parties. Counsel for 

the respective parties are responsible for financial arrangements with their clients and timely payment 

of mediation fees.

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 67 of 68
(6) Within fifteen (15) days of this Order of Referral, any party may file a motion with the court to

defer the mediation. The movant shall set the Motion to Defer for hearing prior to the scheduled date

for mediation. Notice of the hearing shall be provided to all interested parties, including any Mediator

who has been appointed. The motion shall set forth, in detail, the facts and circumstances supporting

the motion. Mediation shall be tolled until disposition of the motion.

Required Attendance at Mediation

(7) Personal appearance of counsel, and each party or representative of each party with authority

to enter into a full and complete compromise and settlement, without further consultation, is

mandatory at mediation. If insurance is involved, an adjuster with authority up to the policy limits

or the most recent demand, whichever is lower, shall attend.

Change/Cancellation of Scheduled Mediation

(8) Written notice to the Mediator of any change or cancellation of the scheduled mediation must

be given at least seventy two (72) hours prior to the scheduled mediation. Failure to provide such

notice shall result in the imposition of the two (2) hour minimum fee paid by the canceling party

to the Mediator, unless the Court orders otherwise for exceptional circumstances beyond the

parties' control or the Mediator agrees to waive same.

Dispensing with Mediation

(9) A party may move, within fifteen (15) days of the Order of Referral, to dispense with

mediation, if:

(a) the issue to be considered has previously been mediated between the same parties

pursuant to Florida law;

(b) the issue presents a question of law only;

(c) other good cause is shown.

Sanctions for Non-Compliance 

(10) If any of the parties fails to comply with the obligations set forth herein to ensure 

that mediation is accomplished expeditiously, the court may, on its own motion or on motion of 

any party, dismiss the case, strike pleadings, enter default, remove the case from the trial 

calendar, or impose any other sanctions that it may deem appropriate under the circumstances.

(5) The parties and designated Mediator are ordered and directed to proceed with mediation in

accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Mediation shall take place within sixty (60) days of the

date of this order.

Scheduling Mediation

Case 1:20-cv-23238-DPG Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 68 of 68