IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

MARCIEA WILLIAMS, 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

LUXOTTICA RETAIL dba 

LENSCRAFTERS, 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No.: 

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF 

CIVIL RIGHTS 

JURY DEMANDED

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This is an action pursuant to the United States Constitution and Title VII of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., as amended. This court has jurisdiction 

under and by virtue of 28 U.S.C §§ 1331 and 1343. 

2. Venue is founded in this judicial district upon 28 U.S.C. § 1391 as the acts 

complained of arose in this district. 

3. Plaintiff, MARCIEA WILLIAMS, has fully complied with the procedural requirements 

of Title VII. She filed a charge of discrimination with the Illinois Department of Human Rights, 

received a right-to-sue letter from the Illinois Department of Human Rights, and brought this lawsuit 

within the applicable time period. 

PARTIES

4. At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff, MARCIEA WILLIAMS, was employed by 

the Defendant LUXOTTICA RETAIL dba LENSCRAFTERS. 

5. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant was and is believed and alleged hereon to 

be a corporation duly organized, existing, and operating within the jurisdiction of this Court. 

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/03/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1
2 

6. Defendant is an employer subject to suit under Title VII in that Defendant is in an 

industry affecting commerce and had 15 or more employees in each of 20 or more weeks in the 

current or preceding calendar year. 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7. Plaintiff is African-American. 

8. Plaintiff began employment with Defendant in 2003. 

9. At all material times, Plaintiff performed her job according to her employer’s 

legitimate expectations. 

10. In April 2010, an employee of LENSCRAFTERS made racially discriminatory 

comments to Plaintiff. 

11. Plaintiff reported these comments to her superiors. 

12. Thereafter, Plaintiff was subjected to unwarranted and false disciplinary actions 

because of her race and in retaliation for complaining about racial discrimination. 

13. As a direct and proximate result of said unlawful employment practices, Plaintiff has 

suffered lost wages, earning capacity, and benefits and has suffered emotional distress. 

14. The aforementioned acts of the Defendant were reckless, willful, wanton, malicious, 

oppressive, and in callous disregard to and indifference to Plaintiff. Thus, Plaintiff requests the 

assessment of punitive damages against the Defendant. 

COUNT I

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN TERMS OF CONDITION AND EMPLOYMENT

IN VIOLATION OF TITLE VII

15. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) as 

though fully set forth at this place. 

16. Plaintiff was qualified for the job she held with Defendant and adequately performed 

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/03/12 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:2
3 

all functions that her job entailed. 

17. Despite Plaintiff’s qualifications and job performance, Plaintiff was subjected to 

different terms and conditions of employment, including but not limited to unwarranted and false 

discipline. 

18. Plaintiff was subjected to these different terms and conditions of employment 

because of her race. 

19. The reasons given by Defendant for these actions are false and are pretext for illegal 

discrimination. 

20. Similarly situated non-African-American employees were not subjected to the same 

terms and conditions of employment as was Plaintiff. 

21. Defendant’s discrimination against Plaintiff was intentional and was on the basis of 

Plaintiff’s race, African-American. 

22. Defendant’s actions, as described above, are in violation of Title VII in that 

Defendant acted to discriminate against Plaintiff in the terms and conditions of her employment 

because of her race. 

COUNT II

RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF TITLE VII

23. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) as 

though fully set forth at this place. 

24. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity when she reported the discriminatory 

comments to her superiors. 

25. After engaging in said protected activity, Defendant disciplined Plaintiff without 

legitimate bases although she was performing to her employer’s legitimate expectations. 

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/03/12 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:3
4 

26. There is a causal connection between Plaintiff’s protected activity and Defendant’s 

retaliatory actions. 

27. Similarly situated employees who did not engage in protected activity were treated 

more favorably than Plaintiff. 

28. Defendant’s reason for Plaintiff’s discipline is false and merely pretext for illegal 

retaliation. 

29. Defendant’s actions, as described above, are in violation of Title VII, as Defendant 

has engaged in acts of retaliation because of Plaintiff’s engagement in protected activities. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MARCIEA WILLIAMS, by and through her attorneys, Ed Fox & 

Associates, requests the following relief: 

 A. That Plaintiff be granted general and compensatory damages in an amount to be 

determined at trial; 

 B. That Plaintiff be granted punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial; 

 C. That the Court grant to Plaintiff her reasonably incurred attorneys' fees, costs, litigation 

expenses, and pre-judgment interest; and 

 D. That the Court grant such other and further relief as the Court may deem just or 

equitable. 

 

 BY: s/ Julie O. Herrera

 Julie O. Herrera 

ED FOX & ASSOCIATES 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

300 West Adams, Suite 330 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

(312) 345-8877 

(312) 853-3489 FAX 

jherrera@efox-law.com 

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/03/12 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:4
5 

PLAINTIFF HEREBY REQUESTS A TRIAL BY JURY

 

 BY: s/ Julie O. Herrera

 Julie O. Herrera 

ED FOX & ASSOCIATES 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

300 West Adams, Suite 330 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

(312) 345-8877 

(312) 853-3489 FAX 

jherrera@efox-law.com 

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/03/12 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:5