1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

SHERRY DEVASHER

PLAINTIFF,

v.

 CASE NO.: 

HOLLY NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM, INC.

DEFENDANT.

____________________________________/ 

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, SHERRY DEVASHER, (hereinafter referred to as “DeVasher” or 

“Plaintiff”), by and through her undersigned attorney, sues the Defendant, Holly 

Navarre Water System, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as the “HNWS” or 

“DEFENDANT”), and alleges as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This is an action to remedy discrimination on the basis of gender, 

hostile work environment, and in retaliation for reporting the discriminatory acts, 

in the terms, conditions, and privileges of Plaintiff’s employment in violation of 

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., 

and the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., Florida 

Statutes, Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 1 of 17
2

262 et seq., and Amendments (ADEAA), and the Florida Public Whistleblower’s 

Act (“FPWA”) §§ 112.3187-112.31895, Florida Statute. 

2. Plaintiff has complied with all conditions precedent and 

administrative remedies have been exhausted and jurisdiction is invoked pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) and the Florida Civil Rights Act of 

1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., Florida Statutes. Plaintiff dual filed a 

Charge of Discrimination with the Florida Commission on Human Relations 

(“FCHR” No.: 201914657) and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission (“EEOC” No.: 15D201800919) on August 6, 2018. On February 2, 

2019, more than 180 days lapsed since the charge was filed and the FCHR had not 

concluded its investigation nor made a determination as required pursuant to Fla. 

Stat. § 760.11(3). Plaintiff requested and the EEOC mailed a Right to Sue notice 

on July 10, 2019, and it was not received until on or about July 15, 2019. 

3. Declaratory, injunctive, and equitable relief is sought pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202, and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g).

4. Costs and attorney’s fees are sought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e5(k) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 54.

5. This action lies in the Northern District of Florida, Pensacola 

Division, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1391(b), because the action arose in this judicial 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 2 of 17
3

district, and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3), because the unlawful 

employment practices were committed in this judicial district.

PARTIES

6. Plaintiff, is a Plaintiff is a 60 year old Caucasian female and a citizen 

of the State of Florida who resides in Navarre, Florida and is an employee within 

the meaning of Florida Private Sector Whistle-blower’s Statute, Fla. Stat. Section

448.101, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e 

et seq., and Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., 

Florida Statutes. 

7. Defendant, HNWS, HNWS is a member owned, not for profit, 

corporation. Each member of the water system holds membership in the 

corporation upon signing a service agreement when connecting to the system. The 

operation of the HNWS is governed by a set of bylaws, which are enforced by a 

seven member-elected Board of Directors. Board members are elected by the 

members for a three year term and receive no compensation. Defendant is an 

“employer,” pursuant to the Florida Private Sector Whistle-blower’s Statute, Fla. 

Stat. Section 448.101, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 

760 et seq., Florida Statutes, as it employs fifteen (15) or more employees. 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 3 of 17
4

FACTS

8. Plaintiff is a 60 year old Caucasian female. 

9. Plaintiff began as Human Resources Director at Holley Navarre Water 

System (HNWS) in August of 2017, and directly reported to the General Manager, 

Paul Gardner.

10. In September 2017, Mr. Gardner filed a complaint against Board of 

Director (BOD) Vice-President James Calkins for harassment and age 

discrimination. 

11. Defendant’s BOD attorney instructed the BOD to seek outside 

counsel due to a conflict of interest. 

12. BOD signed a letter of engagement with a Pensacola law firm to 

investigate and determine any possible liability of the complaint. 

13. Mr. Gardner then filed an additional complaint against BOD Brian 

Kelly in November, 2017, for the same type of harassment and age discrimination.

14. Sometime in December or January, Mr. Calkins and BOD Ricki 

Desantis contacted HNWS IT Specialist Torin Brand and instructed him to give 

them access to Plaintiff’s e-mail and not to let anyone know what he had been 

instructed to do; Mr. Brand complied.

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 4 of 17
5

15. At a Special Called Meeting by James Calkins on Sunday afternoon 

February 4, 2018, Mr. Desantis passed out a copy of an email Plaintiff had sent to 

Mr. Ralph Peterson on December 4, 2017. 

16. The email included attachments (newspaper advertisements, etc.) that 

Plaintiff had gathered.

17. BOD, members Daryl Lynchard and/or Will Goulet said upon looking 

at the e-mail that the BOD needs to get rid of her. 

18. Mr. Lynchard then made the motion and it was decided by majority 

vote that Plaintiff should be terminated. 

19. Upon arrival at work the next day at 7:00 AM, Plaintiff was told that 

the BOD had decided to terminate her position. 

20. Plaintiff’s Separation Notice said “Elimination of My Position”. 

21. In February of 2018, the BOD introduced hired Ms. Jennifer Tweedy, 

a younger and less qualified individual who was given a larger salary, and her job 

description included Plaintiff’s former job duties. 

22. Plaintiff reasonably believed, in good faith, that the BOD’s treatment 

of Mr. Gardner was discriminatory and in violation of both Florida and federal 

anti-discrimination laws.

23. Plaintiff reported the harassment of Mr. Gardner to the investigating 

attorney.

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 5 of 17
6

24. Any possible assertion that Plaintiff was terminated for performance 

reasons, or that there was a viable business justification for the dismissal, is 

entirely pretextual for Defendant’s retaliation and discrimination against her for 

engaging in a protective activity set forth pursuant to the Florida Public Sector 

Whistleblower Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. 

25. Plaintiff had objected, according to a reasonable and bona fide good 

faith belief, to the activities, policies and or practices of the Defendant, which 

violated federal and state anti-discrimination laws. 

26. Plaintiff’s discharge was in close proximity to the aforementioned legal 

objections, in that Plaintiff was ultimately terminated on February 5, 2018; hours 

after the BOD intercepted her e-mails. 

27. There was no legitimate business reason, or business justification, for 

implementing the termination of the Plaintiff from her employment with the 

Defendant; and Plaintiff’s objections to the Defendant’s legal violations were 

reasonably made, in good faith.

28. The adverse personnel action, the termination of Plaintiff from her

employment, as described and set forth above, clearly constituted a prohibited 

employment practice, contrary to the public policy of the State of Florida.

29. As a result of the Defendant’s violations of the Florida Private Sector 

Whistleblower Act, the Plaintiff has been substantially damaged, in that she has 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 6 of 17
7

lost wages, associated job benefits; and in addition, she has sustained 

compensatory damages, based upon emotional distress, associated with the 

wrongful, unlawful and retaliatory discharge from employment. 

30. As a result of being wrongfully and unlawfully discharged from her

employment, Plaintiff has been experiencing anxiety and difficult economic 

circumstances, resulting from the unlawful discharge; and the Plaintiff has also 

sustained continued mental and psychological distress, due to the unlawful 

dismissal from employment.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(TITLE VII – RETALIATION)

31. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in 

paragraphs 1 through 30 of this complaint with the same force and effect as if set 

forth herein.

32. Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff for availing herself of the 

protections afforded her pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

33. Plaintiff objected to, and/or refused to participate in, any activity, policy, 

or practice of the employer which is in violation of a law, rule, or regulation.

34. Plaintiff is now suffering and will continue to suffer irreparable injury 

and monetary damages as a result of Defendant’s discriminatory practices unless 

and until this Court grants relief. 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 7 of 17
8

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(FLORIDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT - RETALIATION)

35. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in 

paragraphs 1 through 30 of this complaint with the same force and effect as if set 

forth herein.

36. Defendant has retaliated against Plaintiff for availing herself of the 

protections afforded her pursuant to the Florida Civil Rights Act.

37. Plaintiff objected to, and refused to participate in, any activity, policy, 

or practice of the employer which is in violation of a law, rule or regulation.

38. Plaintiff has suffered damages and will continue to suffer damages in 

the future as a result of Select actions.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(AGE DISCRIMINATION – FCHR)

39. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in 

paragraph 1 through 30 of this complaint with the same force and effect as if set 

forth herein.

40. This is an action to remedy discrimination on the basis of Plaintiff’s 

age in the terms, conditions, and privileges of her employment with Defendant in 

violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., 

Florida Statutes.

41. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant 

within the meaning of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 8 of 17
9

760 et seq., Florida Statutes.

42. At all times material hereto, Defendant was an employer within the 

meaning of national origin in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as 

amended, Chapter 760 et seq., Florida Statutes, as the Defendant employed more 

than 20 employees. 

43. While employed with Defendant, Plaintiff performed the duties and 

responsibilities of her position in a more than satisfactory manner. 

44. Any possible assertion that there was a viable business justification for 

the Plaintiff’s termination is entirely pretextual for Defendant’s discrimination 

against her for engaging in a protective activity. 

45. The adverse personnel action, the termination of Plaintiff’s employment 

clearly violated Plaintiff’s right under the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as 

amended, Chapter 760 et seq., Florida Statutes. 

46. As a result of the Defendant’s violations of the Florida Civil Rights Act 

of 1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., Florida Statutes, the Plaintiff has been 

substantially damaged, in that she has lost wages, associated job benefits; and in 

addition, he has sustained compensatory damages, based upon emotional distress, 

associated with the wrongful, unlawful and discriminatory termination that lead to 

her discharge from Defendant’s employment. 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 9 of 17
10

47. As a result of being wrongfully and unlawfully discriminated against that 

lead to her discharge from Defendant’s employment, Plaintiff has been 

experiencing anxiety and difficult economic circumstances, resulting from the 

unlawful discharge; and the Plaintiff has also sustained continued mental and 

psychological distress, due to the unlawful dismissal from employment.

48. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned attorney to assist her, in the 

prosecution of this action, and she is obligated to pay said attorney a reasonable fee 

for his professional services. 

49. Plaintiff is entitled to recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs 

pursuant to the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., 

Florida Statutes.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(AGE DISCRIMINATION - ADEAA)

50. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in 

paragraph 1 through 30 of this complaint with the same force and effect as if set 

forth herein.

51. This is an action to remedy retaliation by the Defendant in violation of 

the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 262 et 

seq., and Amendments (ADEAA).

52. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant 

within the meaning of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 10 of 17
11

(ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 262 et seq., and Amendments (ADEAA).

53. At all times material hereto, Defendant was an employer within the 

meaning of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 

U.S.C. § 262 et seq., and Amendments (ADEAA), as the Defendant employed 

more than 20 employees. 

54. While employed with Defendant, Plaintiff performed the duties and 

responsibilities of her position in a more than satisfactory manner. 

55. Any possible assertion that there was a viable business justification for 

the Plaintiff’s termination is entirely pretextual for Defendant’s retaliation against 

her for engaging in a protective activity. 

56. The adverse personnel action, the termination of Plaintiff’s employment 

clearly violated Plaintiff’s right under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act 

of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 262 et seq., and Amendments (ADEAA), and such 

action clearly constituted a prohibited employment practice, contrary to the public 

policy of the FCRA.

57. As a result of the Defendant’s violations of the Age Discrimination in 

Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 262 et seq., and Amendments 

(ADEAA), the Plaintiff has been substantially damaged, in that she has lost wages, 

associated job benefits; and in addition, he has sustained compensatory damages, 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 11 of 17
12

based upon emotional distress, associated with the wrongful, unlawful and 

retaliatory demotion that lead to her discharge from Defendant’s employment. 

58. As a result of being wrongfully and unlawfully retaliatory actions that 

lead to her discharge from Defendant’s employment, Plaintiff has been 

experiencing anxiety and difficult economic circumstances, resulting from the 

unlawful discharge; and the Plaintiff has also sustained continued mental and 

psychological distress, due to the unlawful dismissal from employment.

59. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned attorney to assist her, in the 

prosecution of this action, and she is obligated to pay said attorney a reasonable fee 

for his professional services. 

60. Plaintiff is entitled to recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs 

pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 

U.S.C. § 262 et seq., and Amendments (ADEAA).

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(FLORIDA PUBLIC SECTOR WHISTLEBLOWER ACT – RETALIATION)

61. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in 

paragraphs 1 through 30 of this complaint with the same force and effect as if set 

forth herein.

62. This is an action for a violation of the Florida Private Sector Whistleblower Act, Fla. Stat. Sections 448.101—448.105. 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 12 of 17
13

63. At all material times herein, Plaintiff was an employee of the Defendant; 

HNWS, within the meaning of Florida Statute Section 448.101(3).

64. At all material times herein, Defendant, HNWS, was an employer, within 

the meaning of Florida Statute Section 448.101(3).

65. The adverse personnel action, the termination of Plaintiff’s 

employment clearly violated Plaintiff’s right under the Florida Civil Rights Act of 

1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., Florida Statutes. 

66. As a result of the Defendant’s violations of the Florida Civil Rights 

Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., Florida Statutes, the Plaintiff has 

been substantially damaged, in that she has lost wages, associated job benefits; and 

in addition, she has sustained compensatory damages, based upon emotional 

distress, associated with the wrongful, unlawful and discriminatory termination 

that lead to her discharge from Defendant’s employment. 

67. As a result of being wrongfully and unlawfully discriminated against 

that lead to her discharge from Defendant’s employment, Plaintiff has been 

experiencing anxiety and difficult economic circumstances, resulting from the 

unlawful discharge; and the Plaintiff has also sustained continued mental and 

psychological distress, due to the unlawful dismissal from employment.

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 13 of 17
14

68. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned attorney to assist her, in the 

prosecution of this action, and she is obligated to pay said attorney a reasonable fee 

for his professional services. 

69. Plaintiff is entitled to recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs 

pursuant to the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, as amended, Chapter 760 et seq., 

Florida Statutes.

70. There was no legitimate business reason, or business justification, for 

implementing the termination of the Plaintiff from her employment with the 

Defendant; and Plaintiff’s objections to the Defendant’s legal violations were 

consistently and reasonably made, in good faith.

71. The adverse personnel action, the termination of Plaintiff from her 

employment, as described and set forth above, clearly violated Florida Statute 

Section 448.102(3); and such action clearly constituted a prohibited employment 

practice, contrary to the public policy of the State of Florida.

72. As a result of the Defendant’s violations of the Florida Private Sector 

Whistleblower Act, the Plaintiff has been substantially damaged, in that she has 

lost wages, associated job benefits; and in addition, she has sustained 

compensatory damages, based upon emotional distress, associated with the 

wrongful, unlawful and retaliatory discharge from employment. 

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 14 of 17
15

73. As a result of being wrongfully and unlawfully discharged from her 

employment, Plaintiff has been experiencing anxiety and difficult economic 

circumstances, resulting from the unlawful discharge; and the Plaintiff has also 

sustained continued mental and psychological distress, due to the unlawful 

dismissal from employment.

74. Plaintiff was the subject of retaliation through adverse workplace and 

personnel actions in violation of the Florida Public Sector Whistleblower Act.

75. Plaintiff suffered damages and will continue to suffer irreparable 

injury in the future as a result of the Defendant’s retaliatory acts until this Court 

grants relief. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to enter a 

judgment: 

a) Declaring the acts and practices complained of herein are violations of 

the Title VII, ADEA, FCRA, and Florida Public Sector Whistleblower Act;

b) Enjoining and permanently restraining those violations of the Title 

VII, ADEA, the FCRA and Florida Public Sector Whistleblower Act;

c) Directing the Defendant to take such affirmative action as is necessary 

to ensure that the effects of these unlawful employment practice are eliminated and 

do not continue to affect Plaintiff’s employment opportunities;

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 15 of 17
16

d) Directing Defendant to place Plaintiff in the position she would have 

occupied but for Defendant’s discriminatory treatment of her and make her whole 

for all earnings she would have received but for Defendant’s discriminatory 

treatment, including but not limited to, lost wages (back pay), fringe benefits, 

pension, and other lost benefits.

e) Awarding Plaintiff Front or Future Pay;

f) Awarding Plaintiff liquidated damages; 

g) Compensatory damages, for past and future emotional and health 

distress;

h) The costs of this action, together with reasonable attorney’s fees; and

i) Any other further relief, allowable under § 448.101- 448.105, Florida 

Statutes, Title VII or the FCRA and which is necessary and proper, to make the 

Plaintiff whole, due to the statutory violation.

j) Granting such other and further relief as the court deems just and 

proper in the premises.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 Plaintiff demands Trial by Jury of All Issues So Triable.

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 16 of 17
17

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October 7, 2019.

 

 By: /s/ Clayton M. Connors 

CLAYTON M. CONNORS 

Florida Bar No.: 0095553

Email: cmc@westconlaw.com

R. JOHN WESTBERRY 

Florida Bar No.: 244661

Email: rjw@westconlaw.com

WESTBERRY & CONNORS, LLC.

4400 Bayou Blvd., Suite 32A

Pensacola, Florida 32503

Tel: (850) 473-0401

Fax: (850) 473-1388

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 3:19-cv-03645-TKW-HTC Document 1 Filed 10/07/19 Page 17 of 17