1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JUDY McELVEEN,

Plaintiff, 

v. CASE NO.

MEGAN J. BRENNAN, in her official 

Capacity as POSTMASTER GENERAL,

UNITED STATED POSTAL SERVICE,

Defendant.

_______________________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, JUDY MCELVEEN, hereby sues Defendant, MEGAN J. 

BRENNAN, in her official capacity as POSTMASTER GENERAL, UNITED 

STATES POSTAL SERVICE, and alleges:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an action brought under 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq. (Title VII); 42 

U.S.C §1981a; 29 U.S.C. §621 et seq. (Age Discrimination in Employment Act 

(“ADEA”)); and 29 U.S.C. §794 (The Rehabilitation Act). Jurisdiction of this Court 

is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 (federal question jurisdiction) and 28 U.S.C. 

§1343 (civil rights claim jurisdiction). Costs and attorney’s fees are also sought 

under 5 U.S.C. §504 and/or 28 U.S.C. §2412.

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 1 of 15
2

2. Demand is made herein for damages in excess of Seventy-Five 

Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00). Declaratory, injunctive, legal, and equitable relief 

is sought pursuant to the laws set forth above together with attorney’s fees, costs, 

and damages.

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT

3. Plaintiff has satisfied all conditions precedent to bringing this action 

in that Plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment 

Opportunity office within the Defendant. This action is timely brought thereafter.

THE PARTIES

4. At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff, JUDY MCELVEEN, has been a 

resident of the State of Florida and was employed by Defendant. She is, thus, sui 

juris. Plaintiff is a member of a protected class because of her race (black), age (year 

of birth: 1963), actual or perceived disability (disabled veteran; physical), gender

(female), and retaliation (EEO activity). 

5. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant, MEGAN J. BRENNAN, in her 

official capacity as POSTMASTER GENERAL of the UNITED STATES POSTAL 

SERVICE (“USPS”), has been operating and existing under the laws of the United 

States of America, doing business under the laws of the United States of American 

and the State of Florida. At all times alleged, Defendant was Plaintiff’s “employer”

as the term is used under the applicable laws identified above. 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 2 of 15
3

STATEMENT OF THE ULTIMATE FACTS

6. Plaintiff began her employment with USPS in April 1996 in Kentucky. 

In the Fall of 2017, Plaintiff applied for and received the Manager of Distribution 

Operations (“MDO”) position in Tallahassee, Florida. She assumed the new position 

in December 2017. 

7. Despite Plaintiff’s stellar work performance, Plaintiff was subjected to 

disparate treatment, different terms and conditions of employment, held to a 

different standard because of her race, age, disability, and gender, and was retaliated 

against after reporting unlawful employment practices and disparate treatment.

8. The disparate treatment came at the hands of specifically, but not 

limited to, Plant Manager Patricia Becker, a white woman, who joined the 

Tallahassee branch in February/March 2018.

9. Upon her arrival, Becker began treating Plaintiff and Beverly Brown, 

another older MDO African American female, differently. Becker adjusted 

Plaintiff’s and Brown’s schedules and gave Plaintiff responsibilities of other 

employees. MDO Derrick Culver, black male in his mid-40s, was able to work the 

day-shift schedule he wanted.

10. Becker required Plaintiff to work 6 twelve-hour days every week,

though Culver was not working extended hours.

11. As a physically disabled veteran with a chronic knee condition, Plaintiff 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 3 of 15
4

began to suffer tremendously from the overuse of her knee due to the long work 

week. Plaintiff’s knee injury was chronic and it was hurting and swelling more 

often. Plaintiff’s knee problems limit her daily activities in that she has trouble 

bending, stooping, standing for long periods of time, walking, running, jumping, 

dressing, and bathing. 

12. Becker required that Plaintiff stand all day and walk from one end of 

the plant to the other throughout her shift. The constant use of her knee with little 

time to recuperate caused Plaintiff to walk with an obvious and dramatic limp. 

Becker could see that Plaintiff was suffering and mockingly asked how her leg was 

doing.

13. Plaintiff’s physical therapist evaluated her knee and gave her a cane. 

Knowing that Becker would subject her to further disparate treatment by delaying 

accommodations and not permitting Plaintiff to work, Plaintiff was too afraid to ask 

for a scooter accommodation that she felt would help. Plaintiff’s excessive use of 

her knee led to torn meniscuses on both sides and sciatica. 

14. On April 26, 2018, because of the way that Becker treated Plaintiff, she 

informed Becker that she was filing an EEO complaint. Thereafter the disparate 

treatment and retaliation escalated. 

15. Becker informed Plaintiff that on May 12, 2018, she would be 

reassigned from the MDO position to a lower level position at the Centerville Post 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 4 of 15
5

Office. 

16. At the Centerville office, Becker continued to retaliate. Becker refused 

to grant Plaintiff “e-access” to certain applications in order to complete her job, and 

would not reassign Plaintiff to the Centerville manager so that she could maintain 

control over Plaintiff’s evaluations. These actions were clearly in retaliation for

Plaintiff filing the EEO complaints and a way to monitor Plaintiff.

17. In late August 2018, Plaintiff was reassigned to her original MDO 

position but placed on a 30-day Performance Improvement Plan (“PIP”) in 

accordance with a mediated agreement for two EEO complaints.

18. On October 20, 2018, Becker gave Plaintiff a negative review on her 

End-of-Year Performance Evaluation and falsely asserted that she discussed the 

review with her that day. Plaintiff’s negative review was in retaliation for filing the 

EEO complaints. 

19. In November, 2018, Becker told Plaintiff she had failed her PIP. The 

30-day PIP turned into months of monitoring and was used by Becker as a tool to 

pin the shortcomings of the plant on Plaintiff and sabotage her employment. 

20. Plaintiff suffered considerably due to the disparate treatment by 

Defendant. Not being able to handle the undue stress caused by Becker, Plaintiff 

applied for a Supervisor opening back at the Kentucky plant and was re-hired by her 

former boss. 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 5 of 15
6

21. Becker’s disparate treatment resulted in Plaintiff’s constructive 

demotion to Supervisor back in Kentucky. 

22. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned to represent her interests in this 

cause and is obligated to pay a fee for these services. Defendant should be made to 

pay said fee under the laws referenced above.

COUNT I

GENDER BASED DISCRIMINATION

23. Paragraphs 1-22 are re-alleged and incorporated herein by reference.

24. This is an action against Defendant for discrimination based upon 

gender brought under 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq.. 

25. Plaintiff has been the victim of discrimination on the basis of 

Plaintiff’s gender in that Plaintiff was treated differently than similarly situated 

employees of Defendant who are male and has been subject to poor treatment on 

the basis, at least in part, of Plaintiff’s gender.

26. Defendant is liable for the differential treatment Plaintiff because it 

controlled the actions and inactions of the persons making decisions affecting 

Plaintiff or it knew or should have known of these actions and inactions and failed 

to take prompt and adequate remedial action or took no action at all to prevent the 

abuses to Plaintiff. 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 6 of 15
7

27. Furthermore, Defendant knowingly condoned and ratified the 

differential treatment of Plaintiff as more fully set forth above because it allowed 

the differential treatment and participated in same. 

28. Defendant's known allowance and ratification of these actions and 

inactions actions created, perpetuated and facilitated an abusive and offensive work 

environment within the meaning of the statutes referenced above.

29. In essence, the actions of agents of Defendant, which were each 

condoned and ratified by Defendant, were of a gender-based nature and in 

violation of the laws set forth herein. 

30. The discrimination complained of herein affected a term, condition, or 

privilege of Plaintiff's continued employment with Defendant. The events set forth 

herein led, at least in part, to Plaintiff’s downgrading back to a supervisor position 

in Kentucky. 

31. Defendant's conduct and omissions constitutes intentional 

discrimination and unlawful employment practices based upon gender in violation 

of 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq.

32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's conduct described 

above, Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress, mental pain and suffering, past and 

future pecuniary losses, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life 

and other non-pecuniary losses, along with lost back and front pay, interest on pay, 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 7 of 15
8

bonuses, and other benefits. These damages have occurred in the past, are 

permanent and continuing. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive and equitable relief.

COUNT II

RACE DISCRIMINATION

33. Paragraphs 1-22 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference.

34. This is an action against Defendant for discrimination based upon race 

brought under 42 U.S.C. §2000.

35. Plaintiff has been the victim of discrimination on the basis of her race 

in that Plaintiff was treated differently than similarly situated employees of 

Defendant who are white and has been subject to hostility and poor treatment on 

the basis, at least in part, of her race.

36. Defendant is liable for the differential treatment and hostility towards 

Plaintiff because it controlled the actions and inactions of the persons making 

decisions affecting Plaintiff or it knew or should have known of these actions and 

inactions and failed to take prompt and adequate remedial action or took no action 

at all to prevent the abuses to Plaintiff. Furthermore, Defendant knowingly 

condoned and ratified the differential treatment of Plaintiff as more fully set forth 

above because it allowed the differential treatment and participated in same. 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 8 of 15
9

37. Defendant’s known allowance and ratification of these actions and 

inactions actions created, perpetuated and facilitated an abusive and offensive work 

environment within the meaning of the statutes referenced above.

38. In essence, the actions of agents of Defendant, which were each 

condoned and ratified by Defendant, were of a race-based nature and in violation 

of the laws set forth herein. 

39. The discrimination complained of herein affected a term, condition, or 

privilege of Plaintiff's continued employment with Defendant. The events set forth 

herein lead, at least in part, to Plaintiff’s constructive termination. 

40. Defendant’s conduct and omissions constitutes intentional 

discrimination and unlawful employment practices based upon race in violation of 

42 U.S.C. §2000.

41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s conduct described 

above, Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress, mental pain and suffering, past and 

future pecuniary losses, inconvenience, bodily injury, mental anguish, loss of 

enjoyment of life and other non-pecuniary losses, along with lost back and front 

pay, interest on pay, bonuses, and other benefits. These damages have occurred in 

the past, are permanent and continuing. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive and 

equitable relief.

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 9 of 15
10

COUNT III

AGE DISCRIMINATION

42. Paragraphs 1-22 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference.

43. This is an action against Defendant for discrimination based upon age 

brought under 29 U.S.C. §621 et seq.

44. Plaintiff has been the victim of discrimination on the basis of her age in 

that she was treated differently than similarly situated younger employees of 

Defendant and has been subject to poor treatment on the basis, at least in part, of her 

age.

45. Defendant is liable for the differential treatment towards Plaintiff 

because it controlled the actions and inactions of the persons making decisions 

affecting Plaintiff or it knew or should have known of these actions and inactions 

and failed to take prompt and adequate remedial action or took no action at all to 

prevent the abuses to Plaintiff. Furthermore, Defendant knowingly condoned and 

ratified the differential treatment of Plaintiff as more fully set forth above because it 

allowed the differential treatment and participated in same. Defendant's known 

allowance and ratification of these actions and inactions actions created, perpetuated 

and facilitated an abusive and offensive work environment within the meaning of 

the statutes referenced above.

46. In essence, the actions of agents of Defendant, which were each 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 10 of 15
11

condoned and ratified by Defendant, were of an age-based nature and in violation of 

the laws set forth herein. 

47. The discrimination complained of herein affected a term, condition, or 

privilege of Plaintiff's continued employment with Defendant. 

48. Defendant's conduct and omissions constitutes intentional 

discrimination and unlawful employment practices based upon age in violation of 

29 U.S.C. §621 et seq.

49. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's conduct described 

above, Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress, mental pain and suffering, past and 

future pecuniary losses, inconvenience, bodily injury, mental anguish, loss of 

enjoyment of life and other non-pecuniary losses, along with lost back and front pay, 

interest on pay, bonuses, and other benefits. These damages have occurred in the 

past, are permanent and continuing. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief and 

liquidated damages under the ADEA.

COUNT IV

HANDICAP/DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION

UNDER THE REHABILITATION ACT

50. Paragraphs 1-22 are incorporated herein by reference.

51. This count sets forth a claim against Defendant for discrimination based 

on handicap/disability, Defendant’s perception of Plaintiff as disabled and/or 

Plaintiff’s record of having an impairment, under 29 U.S.C. §794.

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 11 of 15
12

52. Defendant, through its agents, apparent agents, and employees, because 

of Plaintiff’s handicapped/disability constructively demoted Plaintiff. Defendant 

took actions against Plaintiff because of her disabling condition, i.e., by way of 

example but not limitation, she had limitations in her ability to walk, stand, squat, 

and bend, and/or Defendant’s perception of Plaintiff as being disabled.

Alternatively, Defendant perceived Plaintiff to be disabled and took action against 

her as a result thereof and/or failed to reasonably accommodate her.

53. There is no legitimate reason that has been presented, nor can there be 

any legitimate reason, for the adverse treatment of Plaintiff.

54. Defendant harbored ill-motives and intent to cause disparate and 

discriminatory treatment of Plaintiff.

55. Defendant knew or should have known of these conditions as they were 

open and notorious and well known to Defendant. The adverse treatment of Plaintiff, 

together with the facts set forth above, were brought to the attention of Defendant 

and Defendant perpetuated this treatment by condoning the actions and inactions 

affecting Plaintiff. 

56. Defendant is responsible for the violations of Plaintiff's rights as set 

forth herein because it exercised control over the adverse treatment of Plaintiff. In 

the alternative, Defendant failed to properly supervise its employees thereby causing 

foreseeable harm to Plaintiff's rights set forth herein.

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 12 of 15
13

57. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's actions described 

above, Plaintiff has sustained damages including but not limited to mental, nervous, 

and emotional injury. Plaintiff has incurred additional damages including lost 

wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, 

and other damages. These damages have occurred in the past, are occurring at 

present and will continue in the future.

COUNT V

RETALIATION

58. Paragraphs 1-22 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference.

59. Defendant is an employer as that term is used under the applicable 

statutes referenced above.

60. The foregoing allegations establish a cause of action for unlawful 

retaliation after Plaintiff reported or opposed unlawful employment practices 

adversely affecting Plaintiff under 42 U.S.C § 2000e et seq. and other statutory 

provisions cited herein.

61. The foregoing unlawful actions by Defendant were purposeful.

62. Plaintiff voiced opposition to unlawful employment practices during 

Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant and was the victim of retaliation thereafter, 

as related in part above.

63. Plaintiff is a member of a protected class because of his race, and 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 13 of 15
14

because Plaintiff reported unlawful employment practices and was the victim of 

retaliation thereafter. There is thus a causal connection between the reporting of the 

unlawful employment practices and the adverse employment action taken thereafter.

64. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing unlawful acts and 

omissions, Plaintiff has suffered mental anguish, emotional distress, expense, loss 

of benefits, embarrassment, humiliation, damage to reputation, illness, lost wages, 

loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, and other tangible and intangible damages. 

These damages are continuing and are permanent. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive 

relief.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief: 

(a) that process issue and this Court take jurisdiction over this case; 

(b) that this Court grant equitable relief against Defendant under the 

applicable counts set forth above, mandating Defendant’s obedience 

to the laws enumerated herein and providing other equitable relief to 

Plaintiff including reinstatement; 

(c) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff awarding damages 

to Plaintiff from Defendants for Defendant’s violations of law 

enumerated herein; 

(d) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff permanently 

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 14 of 15
15

enjoining Defendant from future violations of law enumerated herein; 

(e) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff awarding costs; 

(f) award costs and attorney’s fees under 5 U.S.C. §504 and/or 28 U.S.C. 

§2412;

(f) award Plaintiff interest; and 

(g) grant such other further relief as being just and proper under the 

circumstances.

DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues set forth herein which 

are so triable.

Dated this 30th day of September 2019. 

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Marie A. Mattox

Marie A. Mattox [FBN 0739685]

MARIE A. MATTOX, P.A.

203 North Gadsden Street

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Telephone: (850) 383-4800

Facsimile: (850) 383-4801

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 4:19-cv-00482-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 09/30/19 Page 15 of 15