UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO URT

SO UTM RN DISTRICT OF FLO RIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DW ISIO N

M ARLOW E D .ROBINSON,

Plaintiff,

VS.

BROW ARD COUN TY SCHOOL D ISTRICT,

ROBERT W . RUNCIE, RICHARD VOLPI,

JEFFERY M OQUIN, DOUG GRIFFW ,

CRM G K OW A LSKI,ERIK LOPEZ,ERIC,

CHISEM , AND SUSAN COOPER,

individually;and in their ox cial capacities,

Defendantts).

FILED BY D.C,

SEF 122222

CALNEGRELAE.NOBLE

KUS.DISXC1:

s o o!cFl..k.-sr. LAuo.

' CaseXO. ''

COU LAINT

Plaintië M ARI-OWE D.ROBINSON,ProSeCcA4r.ROBTNSON''or

4tplaintiff''),pursuantto Rule4(a),FederalRulesofCivilProcedure,sues

I

Defendants,Broward County SchoolDistrict(CéSBBC''orthetr istricf'),

Robert W .Runcie,Richard Volpi,Jeffery M oquin,D oug Griftin,Craig

Kowalski,ErikLopez,EricChisem and Susan Cooper,individually;and in

theiroflicialcapacities,allegesasfollows:

G TR ODUCTION

Plaintif, seeks com pensatory and pllnitive dam ages, and

a11otherrelief allowed by 1aw undertheFlorida Civil(RightsAct,Florida

1

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 1 of 39
Stamtej760.01,etseq.CTCRA'');theCivilm ghtsActof1964,42U.S.C.

j2000eetseq.(1964)TitleW I;42U.S.C.j1981,j1981(a),etseq.and42

U.S.C.j 1983;tlae CivilRightsActof1964,42 U.S.C.j2000d etseq.

(1964)TitleW ;ProtectionofSchoolSpeech,Fla.Stat.j 1003.4505;and,

U.S.Const.Am end.l.,FirstAmendm entagainstthefollow ing:

VENIJE AND JURISDICTIO N

ThisCourthassubjectmatterjurisdictionpursuanttoTitle28j

U.S.C. 1332(a)(1), to adjudicate the Plaintiffs' claims against the

DefendantlsjpursuanttotheforegoingFederalandStatelaw.Strawbridge

u Curtiss,3Cranch267,1806WL 12l3,at*1(FebrtlaryTerm 1806).See

also Da Silva

zoooltdelineatingtwocategoriesofsubjectmatterjurisdiction)

3. A11ofthe complained actions by each Defendantwhich fonn

thebasisforthisCompliantocclzrred inBrowardCounty,Florida.

4. Tlzis is an action w hich seeksenforcem entofand protection

undertheFam ily andM edicalLeaveActof1993,29U SC Section2601,et.

Seq.(hereafterrefered toasCTMLA''Iandclaimsdnmagesin excessof

$75,000.00,exclusiveoffeesandcosts.

2

Kinsho 1nt1 Corp.,229 F.3 d 358,363 (2d Cir.

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 2 of 39
PARTV S

5. SchoolBoard ofBroward County, Florida CCSBBC'')isa

politicalsubdivision ofthe State ofFlorida thathasreceived notice ofthis

claim onorbeforeJune1,2017,pursuanttoj768.2846),FloridaStatute.(a

copy is attached and incorporated by referenceasA PPENDLX EXH O IT

HAO)

6. SchoolBoardofBroward County, FloridaCCSBBC'')hasits

principalplace ofbusinessat600 SoutheastThird Avenve,FortLauderdale,

Florida33301.

At al1 tim es m aterial to this complaint Defendant CSBBC''

employed m orethan 15personsineach oftwentyorm orecalendarweeksin

thecurentorpreviouscalendaryearandwasantçemployer''asdefinedbyj

760.02(7),FloridaStattlteand29U.S.C.j630(b).

8. At a11tim es m aterialto this complaint DefendantRobertW .

Runcie,CçDefendantRuncie'')isanAfricanAmericanmaleandworkedin

Broward County, Florida, form erly employed by KCSBBC'' ms School

DistrictSuperintendentunderj1012.0143),F.S.

9. Atal1timesmaterialto thiscomplaintDefendantRichardVolpi

(DefendantVolpi),is a Caucasian male and works in Broward County,

3

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 3 of 39
Florida,and em ployed by CSBBC''as M anager,Adm inislative Support

Departm ent.

10. At a1l tim es m aterial to this complaint Defendant Jeffery

Moquin (çtDefendantM oquin'')isaCaucasianmaleandworksinBroward

Cotmty,Florida,and em ployedbyGSBBC''asitsChiefofStaE

11. Atalltim esm aterialto tlziscom plaintD efendantD oug Griffin

(çr efendantGriffin'')isaCatlcasianmaleandworksinBrowardCounty,

Florida,andemployedby CSBBC''asSchoolBoard Counsel.

12. all tim es m aterial to this com plaint D efendant Craig

Kowalski(%çDefendant Kowalski'') is a Caucasian male and works in

Broward County, Florida, and employed by

SpeciallnvestigativeUnit(SlU).

GSBBC'' as lnterim Chief

13. Ata11tim esm aterialto thiscom plaintDefendantEricChisem

(çr efendantChisem'')isanAfricanAmericanmaleandworksinBroward

County,Flozidavand ep ployed by GSBBC''asDirectorofNon-lnstructional

I Stam ng.

I

14. Atal1tim esm aterialtothiscomplaintDefendantSusanCooper

(Gr efendantCooper'')isaCaucasianfemaleandworksinBrowardCounty,

Florida,and em ployedby CSBBC''asEm ployeeRelationsSpecialist.

4

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 4 of 39
At a11tim es relevantand m aterialto this complnint,Plaintiff

Marlowe D.Robinson,is an African American (B1ack)male and was

employed by CSBBC''

encom passes preventive maintenance thatis notperform ed or completed

whilestaffandstudentswerepresentatvariousschools.

as tçl-lead Facilities Service Person''which duties

SATISFA CTIO N O F CONDITIONS PRECEDEN T

16. PlaintiF has exhausted a11 adm inistrative rem edies for the

claim s herein which encompasses exhaustion of adm inistrative rem edies

inclusive ofpursuing an appealfrom an adm inistrativem ling.SeeD ivision

of A dminiskative H earings, M arlowe D .Robinson v.Broward Countv

SchoolDistrict,CaseN0.:17-6239Seealso,Fla.Sik'/?SchoolAthleticAss'n

u MelbourneCent.CatholicHighSchool867 So.2d 1281,1288(Fla.5*

DCA 2004)9seeState,Dep'tof Transp.ltHendry Corp.,500 So.2d 218,

221(Fla.1stDCA 1986)9Sovyer14Wainwrlkht,422So.2d1027,1028(F1a.

1stDCA 1982).

17. ThePlaintiFan.dal1oftheDefendantgs)beforetheCourtaresui

juris.

18. Consequently,on April 12,2017,plaintiffsubm itled a formal

complaintto the Florida Commission on Human Relations(FCHR)and

United States Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC), alleging

5

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 5 of 39
discrimination dueto denied disability benefitsaForded tmderA DA ;and a

com plaintforretaliationby defendantVolpiandD efendantM oquin.

19. On M ay 4,2017,A licia M axwell, lnvestigative Specialist,

Florida Comm ission on H tlman Relations acknowledged plaintiff's

com plaintand initiatedFCHR review onM ay9,2017.

20. On July 6,2017,FCI'IR sentitsreportofdefendantGSBBC'S''

çposition Statem ent'to plaintiF and on July 7,2017,forwarded itsfinal

decision dism issing plaintiff's complaintwithotlt an investigation.FCHR

dism issedPetitioner'sChargew ithaçN oReasonableCause''Determ ination.

21. On A ugust 14,20l7,plaintifffiled a notice ofappealto the

FirstDistrictCourtofAppeal,which wastransferred totheFourth District

CourtofAppeal,which courtafftrm edonApril18,2018.

22. Thereafter, plaintiff filed a com plaint with the Equal

EmploylnentOpportunity Commission (EEOC), alleging discrimination

underADA becausehewasdenied apromotion by the defendantls)on

grounds of hisrace and medicaldefciencies.(See alached copies of

Veteran's A dm inistration D etermination incom orated by reference as

APPENDLX EXHIBIT d* '')

6

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 6 of 39
23. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

provided plaintiffitsdecision and Notice ofRiglltto Sueon Septem ber16,

2017.

24. On Decem ber,6 2018,Judge M aryLiCreasy,A dm inistrative

Law for the Florida Division of Administrative Henrings issued its

!

E

recom mended order''asa finalorderdism issing Plaintiff'sFCHR Petition#

201700954.

25. Actinginproperperson plaintiF tiled aComplaintintheUnited

States D istrict Court, Southern District of Florida, alleging Federal

constitutlonaland statutory claims,aswellasclaimsunderççFloridaCivil

Rights Act of 1992.'' (See copy of USDC, Case

Num ber-19-63009-CIV-SM ITH order attached and incorporated by

reference). The complaintsoughtdamagesunder42 U.S.C.j 2000eet

seq.(TitleVlI)forracialdiscrimination;FloridaCivilm ghtsAct,Florida

Statutej760.01,etseq.CFCRA'');theCivilRightsActof1964,42U.S.C.

j2000eetseq.(1964)TitleVH;42U.S.C.j1981,j1981(a),etseq.andb

19839theCivilRightsActof1964,42U.S.C.j2000detseq.(1964)Title

Vl;Protection ofSchoolSpeech,Fla.Stat.j1003.4505;and,U.S.Const.

Am end.l.,First Am endm ent. Ultimately the Courtdism issed the case

withoutprejudiceonJuly14,2020.

7

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 7 of 39
26. A11conditions precedent to the m aintenance of this suitand

PlaintiF's claim shasotherwisebeenfulfilled,perform ed oroccurred.

27. UnderSection 760.10(1(a),FloridaStatute, itisanunlawful

em ploym entpractice foran em ployerto

refuse to hire any individual, or othem ise to discrim inate against any

''

. . . To discharge orto failor

individualw ith respectto compensatiow terms,conditions,orprivilegesof

em ploym ent,because ofsuch individual'srace,color,religion,sex,national

origin,age,handicap,orm aritalstatus.''

28. UnderSection 230.22(1)(2),Florida Statute,both theschool

board (ICSBBC'')and defendantRtmcieheld a fiduciary dutyforefficient

operation and improvementforthe schooldistrict,including butnotlim ited

to,enforcing,withoutdelay allstateand federallawspertainingtounlawful

discrimination,according Section760.10(1(a),FloridaStatute.

GENERALALLEGATIONS

29. PlaintiF beganemploym entwith defendzm tCSBBC''onApril7,

1998heldtheposition oflaborerbe> een 1998and2000.

30. On October2,2000,Plaintiffadvancedto thepositionofç'Head

Facilities Selvice Person'' directly under supervision ofdefendantsVolpi,

M oquin,andRuncie.

8

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 8 of 39
Although Plaintiff was classised as Gl-lead Facilities Service

Person''# heperfonnedthedutiesofa 'Building OperationsSupervisor''.l

32. PlaintiF com plàined to the ECSBBC'' Human Relations

Departmenton February 18,2016,seeking reclassification to the ''Building

Opcrations Supervisor''title and retroactive compensation for past due

wagesforçworkingoutofclassification''.

33. DefendantVolpideniedthecomplaintrslfindingno basisfor

thecomplaint/grievanceunderthecollectivebargaining agreem ent,contrary

to theprovisionoftheCSBBC''andITOPE''contract.(SeeValW illiams

letter dated August24,2016 attached and incorporated by referenceas

APPENDLX EXHIBITGB'').

34. Plaintiff subm itted a com plaint to the Public Employees

Relations Commission pursuant to jj 295.07 and 295.14(1),Florida

Statutes, on August 24, 2016,which alleged unfair labor practices by

GSBBC''asstatedinparagraph 22slvra.

35. Plaintifffiled aglievanceon October 18, 2016,whichalleged

insuffkientpersonnelto accom modate the building sanitation and health

carestandardsrequiredbytheOccupationalSafetyandHealthAct(OSHA).

36. Plaintifffiled a on October 19,2016,allegingdefendant

BuildingOperationsSupervisoroverseealtheactivitieswithinaspecificdepartmentorareaofanSBBC.

They monitor the eflicacy of the departmento improve operating processes, and reportto upper

management.Operationssupervisorswork in a'variety ofsetlings,depending ontheindustrytheywork

within.

9

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 9 of 39
Volpisubjectedhim toinappropriateandunwelcomed physicalcontacton

October18,2016,withoutinvitation orconsent.

37. Thereafter,asprovided in the CûSBBC''policy and procedures

m anual,defbndantVolpiwasrequired to transferthe grievancetoaseparate

oftice. lnstead,defendantVolpideniedthegrievancels)withoutprocedural

translation to any superiorm anagem entom cialforinquiry and witlmutany

action.

38. N otwithstanding thatlsraelCanales,M anager,Adm inistrative

SupportDepartm ent,advised plaintiffthathewaseligibleand qualifiedfor

the ''Building Operations Supervisor'' position, defendant Volpi denied

Canales'recomm endationw ithoutcauseorproceduralcompliance.

39. PlaintifffiledagrievanceOctober19,2016,which alleged that

defendantVolpifailed to payplaintiffovertimewagescontrary to theEqual

PayAct.

40. Additionally,plaintifffiled a grievance with Susan Cooperof

the<CSBBC''em ploym entrelation depprtm enton October 19, 2016,which

alleged thatdefendantVolpifailed to pay overtim e wagesto subordinate

staffm em berscontrarytotheEqualPayA ct.

41. Acting underhissupervisory status,Plaintiffsubmitted a

grievance on or about M arch 21, 2017, to defendant Runcie asserting

10

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 10 of 39
bullying conductby EA Lopez upon subordinate staffDunia Gillcontrary

toGCSBBC''Anti-BullyingPolicy5.9,(F.S.s.1006.147),'andofaconspiracy

consistent with a ''long-standing custom , policy, and/or practice'' of

deliberateindiFerenceofabusewithintheBroFardCounty SchoolD istrict.

42. PlaintiF filed a grievanceon October 19, 2016,which alleged

that defendant K owalski's failure to specitically investigate plaintiF's

reportsof im properactivities,where adm inistrative staffperform ed illegal

conductin the verbalscolding ofM s.Dunia Gillpublicly;and causing a

hostilework environm entduetoacontinuedfearofunwarrantedreplim ands

weretmlawfulactsinviolationoftheCivilRightsActof1964,42U.S.C.j

2000detseq.(1964)TitleV1.

43. PlaintiF subm itted a m em orandum notice to defendantRtmcie

oftheforegoing abuseofM s.DuniaGillby defendantLopez.afterlenrning

of the Dunia G illabuse,defendantRuncie failed to perform his statutory

obligation to otherstaF personnel,instead.defendantRunclerecommended

theodioussuspensionoftheplaintiF totheSchoolBoard.

44. PlaintiF ftled a grievance alleging that defendant M oquin

falsely represented (çthatplaintiffand lsraelCanales had someone else in

mind forthe %utilitiesservice person already''to apotentialjob change

candidate(Edwin Gutierez)withoutplaintiff'sknowledge,permissionor

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 11 of 39
consentasreqtliredby CTSBBC''policy andproceduresm anual;andthatsuch

statem entwascompletely false and no such placementwasapplied during

plaintiffs'em ploym ent.

45. On oraboutApril7,2017, plaintifffileda grievancealleging

thatfollowing plaintiffs'submission ofthe lbrmalgHevancers)behveen

Febnmry 18,2016 through April7,2017,defendnntVolpi's unwr anted

suspension againstplaintiffw as an actofretaliation contrary to CSBBC''

policy and procedures . (See attached copies of seven (7) formal

grievancesincorporatedbyreferenceasAPPENDLX EXHIBIT<çC5')

46. Notwithstanding his m edical infirm ities unwarm nted

harassm entby defendnntVolpi,theplaintiffcontinuedhispursuitofredress;

and ultim ately on April20,2018,defendantChisem sentarecom mendation

that the plaintiF be term inated.

adm inistratorsterminated plaintifftmlawfully contrary to Fedemland State

On M ay 9,2018,DefendantCSBBC''

law.

i

' 47. Ata11tim esrelevantandm aterialto thiscomplaintthePlaintiff

was employed by the defendantls) GSBBC''; and was eligible for

advancem entaccording thePoliciesand ProceduresofCESBBC''w ith eight

(8)professionalcertiticatesofproficiency stemming from 1998 to2017.

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 12 of 39
(See attached certifkates incorporated by reference as APPENDW

EXHIBIT KE M)

COUNT I

A.

VIOLATION O F IJNFM R LABOR PM CTICE A CT

BY SUPERINTENDENT RO BERT W .RUNCR

48. PlaintiF re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-47above,asiffullystatedtherein.

49. During the tim eperiod relevantto thiscom plaint,defendant

Runcie w as the Superintendentof the Brow ard County SchoolDistrictz.

DefendantRuncie held a statutory and fiduciary duty as executive

officer of BCSD to m aintain a safe w ork environm ent.

Rtmcie neglected to investigateplaintifr'sprotectedactivityin disclosureof

yet, Defendant

EG Lopezs' abusive conduct allegations including those reported by

adm inistrativepersonnelJefferyM oquinandlsraelCanales.

50. A sadirectandapproxim ateresultofhisom ission byfailureto

use ordinary care under a1l circum stances in the perform ance of a duty

imposeduponhim asSuperintendentoftheBrowardCounl SchoolDistrict,

2 AsSuperintendent,RtmciewastheexecutiveoxceroftheSchoolBoard,seeFla.Stat.j

1001.33.tasked with implementing andenforcingSchoolDistrictpoliciessetoutbytheSchool

Board,aswellassupervisinganddisciplining em ployees.

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 13 of 39
plaintiF hassuffered theproxim atechargesofdiscrim ination,retaliationaild

inappropriatecontactharassm entassetfol-thherein.

: 51. Notwithstanding that SBBC operations and maintenance

facilities were understaFed, defendant Chisem perm ited application of

tm fair laborpracticesby declining to rescind the culturally biastestwhich

! ,

wasadministeredtoplaintx ssubordinatestal whichfailurebydefendant

Volpiprovided foronly four(4)fulltimeandone(1)subordinatefacility

service persons to perform the m aintenance servicesrequired attheKCW

Buildingnightshift.

52. Throughoutthe relevanttime period in this case,defendant

Runcie did not reportthe egregious conduct of the defendants to the

appropriateauthorities,despitetheirstate-m andatereportingobligation.See

1001.51,F.S.(2018).

53. Thenegligenceofthesuperintendentintheperform ancesofhis

ofticialdutiesrendershim and CSBBC''liable upon the claim s setforth in

thiscom plaint.

54. On or about M ay 2, 2017, plaintiff subm itted a grievance

com plaint asserting thatdefendantRuncie failed to perform hisstatutory

obligation to recom mend the placem entofschoolpersonnel;andtorequire

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 14 of 39
compliance and observance ofa1lrulesand regulationsoftheC<SBBC''and

thelawsoftheStateofFlorida,

55. DefendantRuncie w illfully neglected to perform hisfduciary

duty by not correcting the misconduct of defendant Volpi by not

reclassifyingtheaccuratejobtitleandpayscalelbrplaintifl-asimpliedand

agreed to on August24,2016 3 ;by failing to enforce disciplinary action

againstErik LopezforverbalabuseuponD uniaGillonAugust18,2015;by

failing to im plem entpolicy thatensure m aterialinvestigative evidence be

secured;by failing to im plementpolicy thatensure the non-instructional

Facility Selwice Person employee testcuniculum m eets Federalguideline

prohibitionsagainstbiasness.

56. On Decem ber l9, 2016, CSBBC'' afforded ç'reasonable

accom m odations'' for plaintif's m edical conditions of sleep apnea,

hypertension,PTSD,degenerative spinaldisc disease,spinalstenosis,knee

problem s and ofthe s'urgery on lzis leftwrist,butw ere notimplemented

untilJanuary 12,2017.

On or about October 2,2010,Plaintiff becam e eligible for

placem entto the position ofçBuilding Operations Supenzisor''based upon

3 See HSBBC'' correspondence Valerie W illiams, Esq.. dated August 24, 2016 ICSBBC''

reclassitkation decision which never proceeded to FOPE Arbitmtion atfncthed and incomorated by

reference.

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 15 of 39
hisqualificationsand soughtadvancem entto this position which earnings

outweigh thesalaryplaintiffwasreceiving.

58. Plaintifr consulted lsrael Canales, M anager A dm inistrative

Support, regarding thisjob promotion with a step twelve status. Mr.

Canales replied thatplaintiF does qualify for the position. M r.Canales

contacted Lorenzo Calhoun,who advised çthat it will be taken care by

m akingthenecessarytransitionbecauseplaintiffm etthequalitk ation.''

59. N otwithstanding defendantRuncie's awareness that plaintiff

perform ed the duties ofçBuilding Operations Supervisor''and thathe did

notreceivethe salaly associatedwiththatposition,defendantRunciedidnot

acu owledgeorendorsed asalary increaseaspresentedbyLorenzoCalhoun

ofCanales'srecom m endation forreclassificationto theBuilding Operations

Supervisor.

60. At a11 times m aterial and relevant SBBC operations and

maintenancefacilityties)wereunderstaFed,whichsupportstheclaimsset

outby plaintiffdue to defendantRuncie'scontinued failure to perform his

statutory obligationunderSection 1005.51,F.S.

61. PlaintiF alleges that defendant Rtmcie failed to perform his

statutory obligation to recom mend the placem ent of schoolpersonnel;to

require com plianceand observance ofa11laws,rtllesand regulationsofthe

16

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 16 of 39
District and the State of Florida,by willfully neglecting to perform his

designated duty by notimplementing apolicy orprocedurethatsupersedes

step tw o ofthegrievanceprocedurewhich eliminatesreview ofagrievance

by the employee against their im m ediate supervisor,thereby permitting

defendantVolpito circum ventunlawfulretaliation,discrim ination claim s,

contrarytoFederalandStatelawls).

CO UNT H I

CLAIM ON E AGAINST RICHARD VOLPI AND

RFFERYMOOUINUNFAIRLABORPM CTVEACT

62. PlaintiF re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-61aboveasiffully stated therein.

63. In accordance of SchoolBoard of Broward County,Policy

4011(9),plaintiffappliedforthepositionofBuildingOperationss'zfpcznzgor

to his im m ediate supervisor, defendant Volpi and requested that to be

consideredforadvancem enttotheposition.

64. PlaintiF consulted lsrael Canales, QCSBBC'' Adm inistrative

Supportp Managerregardingthejobpromotionwithasteptwelvestams.

M r.Canales inform ed plaintif thathe does qualify forthe position. M r.

Canales then contacted Lorenzo Calhoun,whoadvisedM r.Canales ç'thatit

willbe taken care ofby maldng the necessary transition because plaintiff

m etthequalitk ationa''

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 17 of 39
65. PlaintiF allegesthatdefendantVolpidiscrim inatedagainsthim

with malfeasance and the malicious intent to establish evidence for

employm entterm ination by ignoringplaintiff'sm edicaldeficiency andby a

deliberate failure to pass plaintiff over for the position of Building

Operations skwcrwbwr, which plaintiF was qualified f'er and eligible.to

m eet.

66. Plaintif alleges that without reasonable notice or the

opportunity forconsideration and in spite ofM r.Calhoun'sconcurrenceto

place plaintiF as Building Operations Supervisor, that,defendant Volpi

denied plaintiff's a prom otion and instead placed Edwin Gutierrez,an

unqualified non-veteran H ispanic m ale with lesstenurethan theplaintiffto

thepositionofBuilding OperationsSupervisor.

67. PlaintiF alleges that defendant Volpi failed to pay plaintiff

overtime wagescontrary to theEqualPay Acteven though defendantVolpi

acknowledgedthatplaintiffexceededtheworkschedulehours.

68. Thereafter, plaintiff notified defendant Volpi the he will be

seelcingbackpay fortheadditionallaborthathewasrequired toperform due

to having to work beyond his scheduled hours because Volpirestricted

availablestaffpersonnel.

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 18 of 39
69. PlaintiF allegesthatdefendantVolpidiscrim inated againsthim

with deliberate indifference by writen notice ofunsupported claim sofin

subornation, contrary to Article 9, E7, B'TU-TSP Agreement and j

1003.4505,Fla.Stat.

70. Defendant Volpi then sent defendant Runcie a letter/notice

<çrecom m ending thatplaintifrreceive a 3-day paid suspension forfailing to

follow reasonable attendance policiesand progressivediscipline''butfailed

to apply thesam econductagainstM ichaelDalrym plewhohadnotreceived

any disciplinary actions after defendant Volpi discovered M ichael

Dalrym pleunauthorizedabsences.

CO UNT W

AGAINSTJEFFERY M OQUIN FOR LIBELAND IJNFAIR

LABOR PM CTICE

Plaintif re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsin paragraphs1-70aboveasiffully statedtherein.

72. 'l'he plaintifffiled agrievancealleging thatdefendantM oquin

falsely stated to apotentialjob changecandidate(Edwin Gutierez)ç%that

plaintiF and lsraelhad som eoneelse in m ind forthetutilitiesserviceperson

already''withoutplaintiF 'sknowledge,permissionorconsent.

73. Plainti/ subm itted a m emorandum notice to defcndantRuncie

oftheabuseofM s.Dunia GillbydefendantLopez.Afterlearning aboutthe

i

2

-

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 19 of 39
abuse, defendant M oquin failed to perform his stattztory obligation to

reprim and defendantLopez,who posed a risk to the safety ofDunia Gill

and/orotherstaffpersonnel. lnstead,defendantRuncieacquiescedwiththe

odioussuspensionrecom mendation oftheplaintiffby theSchoolBoard.

CO UNT V

ER IC M .CH ISEM

IJINFAIR LABOR PR ACTICES IN VIO LATION OF FLSA

74. PlaintiF re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-73 aboveasiffully stated therein,

75. As Head Facilities Serviceperson,plaintiff wasauthorized to

take corrective nxeasures to accom modate crew m em bers and other

candidates

Under his supervision seeking continued employmentand training which

included advancenoticefrom defendantChisem ofnew em ploym entcriteria

orpolicieswhichdirectly affectsthenightshiftpersonnel.

76. PlaintiF subm itted agrievanceon oraboutSeptember30,2017

alleging defendantChisem discrim inated againstplaintiF andotherm inority

classem ployee's due to enactmentofan unlawfulIBasicFacilitiesService

Person/custodian' test culmrally bias and not conducive to Latin and

A frican A mericans; and not appropriately necessmy to prepare for

i employmentqualification.

i

I

20

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 20 of 39
CLATM AG AINST ERIC M .CH ISEM

PlaintiF re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

preceding allegationsinparagraphs1-76aboveasiffully statedtherein.

78. Plainti/ is responsible for m aking the subordinates' daily

assignments,and forsupervising theirwork detailsattheKCW Building.A

facility serviceperson is charged with the responsibility of providing a

sanitary and safe environm ent. Each custodian should beoriented,trained,

and supported during daily work in such a w ay as to enable personal

fulfillm entaswellasachieving propercare ofthe site. Essentially,these

em ployees have custody ofthe administrative building to ensure building

sanitation,andm eetallhealthcarestandards.

79. Plaintiff advised defendantChisem thatpersons with lim ited

Englishproficiencym ustbeaffordedam eaningfulopportunitytoparticipate

in programsthatreceive federalfunds,yet,defendantChisem im plied that

plaintif's

Departm ent of Education ''M aintenance & Operations Administmtive

''SBBC'' stafl- work routine w as structured on the 2001

Guidelines protocol for employm ent qualification without review of

applicablestandards.

80. On or about August, 2016, defendant Chisem , failed to

im plem ent con-ective m easures to provide a conducive training diversity

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 21 of 39
curriculum which specificallydesignedtoavertselectethnicr oupsorraces

from employm ent

guidelinesand provisions of1aw and wasnotacu owledged by defendant

and/or advancement at SBBC, contrary to Federal

N orton.

81. PlaintiF allegesthatsBBc policypermittingtheBasicFacilities

Service Person/custodian'Test directly infringes upon Federalstandards

that deny or have the eFect of denying persons with lim ited English

proficiency equal access to Federally funded program s for w hich such

personsqualify.

82. Rather than implem enting a training program with adequate

intep reterservicesthatareneeded fortheclassmem berto benefitfrom the

training program ,defendantChisem deliberately infused the plaintiffand

hissubordinatestoparticipatein thecoursewithoutaproperintep reter.

COUU VI

DELD ER ATELY D DW FERENT BY RICH ARD VO LPI

83. Plaintif re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphsl-8zaboveasiffullystatedtherein.

84. DefendantVolpiknow ingly began m aterially false accusations

alleging that plaintiff failed to follow 4tSBBC''policy by notproviding

notice to Volpi's Secretary ofprospective tardiness;and made false and

22

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 22 of 39
slanderous written allegations ofexcessive tardiness and insubordination.

Yet,on October 10,2016,DefendantVolpiauthoxized an exem ptionwhich

refutes allegationsoftardiness orabsence,which specifically states

Unless your work requirements are justified (See FCIHR

Charge#201700954,Position Statem ent,atpage2,attached hereto and

incorporatedbyreferenceasAPPENDIXEXHIBIT<T'')

85. Plaintiff subm itted a grievance on October 19, 2016, to

Em ployee& LaborRelationsDepartmentallegingthatDefendantVolpiwas

deliberately indifferent by failing to afford or provide overtim e work

opportunitiesto plaintiffand hisstaF subordinatesasoutlined by personnel

payrollrecords,which plaintiF discussed with DefendantVolpion October

10,2016 and DefendantVolpiagain declined to effectuate scheduling of

overtim efortheplaintifforanynightcrew personnelwhich defendantVolpi

affordedtodayshiftpersormel.

86. Consequently, defendant Volpi did not follow the overtim e

roster pursuant to the GSBBC'' procedures. lnstead, defendant Volpi

afforded overtime schedttling exclusively to day shiftpersonneland denied

thesam eovertimew orkschedulingtoplaintiff'snightshiftpersonnel.

87. Plaintiff asserts thaton or aboutM arch 2,2016, defendant

Volpi continued application of retaliation by subm itting im proper

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 23 of 39
disciplinary actiongsqagainsttheplaintiffbased upon plaintifs'existing

disability withoutjustitkations with the recommendation to the School

Board forem ployeetermination isunwarranted.

88. Plaintiff alleges that defendant Volpi,

engaged in a pattern of reprisals where defendantVolpi,issued oraland

written reprim andsand slanderouscomm entsthathaveultim ately infringed

or defam ed Plaintiff's reputation and charactercom m encing on February

18, 2018,by ignoring m ilitaly service related disabilities and plaintiff's

inability toperform certaindetailsduetoplaintiff'smedicalcondition;anda

constantprocess of intim idation or bullying by unlawfulaccentuation of

authorized conductunderthe ADA agreem ent;and the established FM LA

accom m odations where plaintiff was having a propensity for medical

restrictions. 89. Plaintiff specifically asserts

that, following his notice to Israel Canales that Bettye Ray requested

plaintiF to retrieve parking lotm eterm achinesfundsand deliverCtSBBC''

fundsdirectly to herwassuspicious which plaintiF perceived astreported

thathebelievedBettyeRay wasstealingtheftm ds.''

90. Defendant Volpi im properly sought to im peach plaintiff by

asking 4<what tim e did plaintiff leave the KCW building.''ln response,

plaintiF advised çthathe did notrecallbutthatthe security cnm era would

24

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 24 of 39
show the exact tim e that he exited the loading dock security gate.''

DefendantVoplireplied çthathewillnotlook atthefootageforverilcation,

untilplaintifftellhim theexacttim eheleftKCW .''Atnotim ediddefendant

Volpiever cite plaintiF fororallege thatin his tardinessorabsence that

plaintiF abandonedhisjob.(Seeemailcommunicatitm datedOctober20,

2017,attached and œ corporated by referenceasA PPENDIX EXH IBIT

;9G#>j

91. During his em ploym ent tenure, M r. Robinson continually

experiencedisabilityGflare-upgsq'andhavehadtoeitherreporttoworkata

K .C.W rightBuilding lateornotatall.

92. PlaintiF asserts thatdefendantVolpi'sharassm entagainstthe

plaintiff, affected plaintiff's working conditions and perfonnance to the

pointthatplaintiF wasforced totakeFM LA leaveso thathecouldgetrelief

from theanxietyandstressapplieduponhim .

93. PlaintiF asserts that defendant Volpi made the working

conditionsfortherlightshiftstaffso intolerable atthe KCW Building that

any reasonableperson in plaintiff'sposition would seek ram ification ofsuch

conditions.

CO UN T VlI

BATTERY UPO,N

PLAG TIFF BY RICH ARD VO LPI

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 25 of 39
94. PlaintiF re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-93 aboveasiffully statedtherein.

95. Plaintifffiled a grievanceto employm entrelation departm ent

on October 19,2016,which alleged thatfollowing a meeting atthe School

BoardRoom onOctober16,2016,hewaspassingRicharbVolpi, hewas

subjectedtoinappropriatecontactbydefendantVolpi.

96. PlaintiF assertsthatthism isconductw asdisturbing and altered

the conditions of his employm ent under Volpi's supervision creating an

untrusting and unethical working environm ent and one that plaintiF

discernednotinnocentbutintentionally abusiveto thepointthat,otherthan

subm ission of electronic correspondence and/or grievances, plaintiff

physically avoideddefendantVolpi.

97. PlaintiF states thatthe above stated harassm ent supportsthe

supposition that the CSBBC'' adm inislators had çknowledge, or

constructive know ledge''ofthe improper conductby defendantVolpiand

failed to investigateortakecorrectiveaction mssetoutin SBBC policy and

procedureswhich restlictsharassm entandretaliationuponan em ployeethat

invokesthegrievanceprocess.

COUNT VlI1

RICH ARD VOLPIFOR RETALIATIO N

26

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 26 of 39
98. Plaintiff re-alleges and incop orates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparav aphs1-97aboveasiffully statedtherein.

99. PlaintiF allegesthatasa NightShiftGkH ead FacilitiesService

Person''he has been retaliated againstby defendantVolpi,asa resultof

plaintiF flling com plaint/grievances againstdefendantVolpiforfailing to

endorse prom otion advancem ent; for his reporting of improper

governm entalactivities.

100. On N ovem ber9,2016,Volpiprovided written directive to the

plaintiffadvisingplaintifftoreporttoam eeting scheduledforNovember16,

2016 for the specific purpose of pre-disciplinary m eeting regarding

plaintiF'salleged failtlreto comply with a directive ofOctober 10,2016to

beanactofretaliation.

101. On Decem ber 5,2016,Volpiissued verbalreprim and which

alleged that plaintiff failed to comply with prior authorized directives.

Contrastingly,PlaintiffassertsthatdefendantVolpiengaged in harassm ent,

hum iliating tacticsand deliberateindifferentagainstplaintiF byissuanceof

a SBBC BCSD letter directing plaintiff to repod for a pre-disciplinary

m eeting

102. PlaintiF filing a grievance On M arch 23, 2017, alleging

consistentbullying,intim idation,and ham ssmentin responseto plaintiff's

27

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 27 of 39
exercise ofthe Rightto redress the circllmstanceswhich hasresulted in a

strained relationship between theplaintiffand building tenantsattheKCW

Building environm ent depriving plaintiff of effectively pedbrm ing his

assigned duties,because building tenants were notreceptive to plaintiF 's

authority as itrelatesto theoperation and m aintenance ofK CW Building,

thereby causing a seculity breach when plaintiF was tmder an urgent

m edicalabsence and unknown to the plaintiF,a co-workertàiled to secure

an exterior building door and instead contacted defendantVolpi's office

withoutnoticetoplaintiff.

103. Following defendant Volpi's investigation/inquiry as to what

tim e did plaintiff leavethe KCW building,the plaintiffsentanotherem ail

aboutthe defendantVolpiand he was suspended and then term inated for

continuing to be çpreoccupied'' with the grievance progress and

resolutionlsq.

104. The substance ofplaintiff'scom plaints isintertwined with the

egregiousretaliation measures implem ented by defendantVolpi;and those

em ployeesunderhisdirectauthoritywhich m ustbedecideduponthem erits

ofplaintiff'sgrievancescollectively.

COUNT W

JEFFEREY M OO W N FOR D ELD ER ATE IM HFFERENCE

28

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 28 of 39
105. Plaintiff re-alleges and incofporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-104aboveasiffully statedtherein.

106. On or aboutM arch 23,2017,plaintiffinitiated the p-ievance

procedure by filing a grievance pursuant to SBBC Policy 4015 to the

Em ployec Relation D epartm entalleging that,on orbefore M arch 6,2017,

during agrievanceconferencewith defendantsGutierrezand M oquin inthe

course ofspeaking with Gutierrez,stated to Gutierrez that,''M arlowe and

lsraelhadsom eoneelsein mindfortheposition already.''

COUNT X

DELIBtM TE INDIFFERENCE

JEFFERY M OOUINAND CRM G KOWALSKI

107. Plaintiffre-alleges and incorporatesherein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-106aboveasifftllly statedtherein.

108. On or aboutAugust 18,2015,video camera footage on the

tenth tloor inside the KCW Adm inistrative Building recorded a verbal

assault by defendant Lopez upon M s.Dunia Gill. Thereafter plaintiff

notified defendant Runcie but no review or corrective action was

implementedcontl-arytojj447.501(1)(b),Fla.Stat.

109. Plaintifr further alleges that defendants Kowalslci, and

Moouin''intentionalyconcealed''thevideofootageoftheverbalabuseby

ErikLopezuponDuniaG ill.

29

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 29 of 39
CO UN T M

RICH ARD VOLPI FOR VIO LATING H EALTH INSUM NCE

PORTABILITYAND ACCOIJNTABILITYACT (HIPAA)

110. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs 1-109aboveasiffullystatedtherein.

111. Plaintiff, alleges that defendant Volpi violated plaintiff's

conlidentialhealth information rights by failing to com ply w ith CCSBBC''

Policy 4001.1,6.a.2.,by exposure ofhism edicalinflrm ities'to an unrelated

personnelon oraboutM arch 28,2017,withoutnoticeorconsenttopersons

unknown and unrelated during two pre-disciplinary meetingls), on

Novem ber 30,2016 and M arch 27,2017 in openly discussing plaintiff's

m edical deficiencies' in the presence of a third party which was not

authorizedbytheplaintiE

CO UNT XH

AGAIN ST D OUGLA S G.GRIFFIN UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE

112. PlaintiF re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-l11aboveasiffully statedtherein113. On oraboutSeptem ber24,2016,plaintiF fonvarded am em o

to Doug Griffm inquiring abouta February 18,2016 grievance relating to

ççworkingoutofclassification''whichplaintiF wasnotcompensated for.

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 30 of 39
114. DefendantGriflin knowingly refused to and deliberately failed

to acknowledgeplaintiff'sconcern by eitherappointm entordocum entation

ofam andatoryem ployee contractprovision providing necessaryprocessing

ofdocumentation and/oritssatisfaction.

COUNT XIH

AGAINST SUSAN CO OPER FOR UNFAIR LA BOR PM CTICE

115. PlaintiF re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the

precedingallegationsinparagraphs1-114 aboveasiffully statedtherein.

116. PlaintiF firstcomm encedhispursuitofequalcompensation on

or about February 18, 2016, by filing a grievance with the I'SBBC''

employee relationsdepartment,seeking soughtjob title reclassitkation

based upon worldng out of classification duties w ithout adequate

compensation formorethan aseven-plus(7)years;qualificationsbased

upon contkm ed CESBBC''satisfactory em ployee evaluations from 1998 to

2018 and profciency certifications4; and facility site size capacity.

Consequently, defendant Cooper evaluated plaintiff's contentions and

presented the matter to the school board for consideration. However,

defendant Cooper failed to represent to the schoolboard thatplaintiffs'

4 Seeeopr ofHKSBBC''non instructionalemployeeperformaxceevaluationlsl''conducted

annually beginningM ay 3,1999 througE June28,2017 and relevaatprofessionalaccommodation

notices,attached and incorporated by reference as APPENDW EXHTBIT KI''and required

competencyorproficiencycertm cationsasAPPENDLX EXTIIIXT Gtr'.

31

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 31 of 39
department head, Canales, recom m ended the pay salary increase Nvhich

would ultim ately alleviateplaintiff'seftbrtto be classified to astep twelve

position andreceiptofacom m ensuratesalmy

DefendantCooperknowingly endorsedreclassification w ithout

thesalary incrcaseby stating thatçtplaintiffwasalready therecipientofdual

pay salary,when in fact,thesalarybased hadnotbeenappliedorprovided in

plaintiF'sregularpay scale orthattheclassiGcation asBuilding Operations

Supervisorhadbeen approved.

CO UNT X W

W RON GFUL TERM INATIO N

118. PlaintiF realleges and adopts, as fully set forth in of the

allegationsinparagraphs1- 1l7and states:

119. PlaintiF asserts that the Defendantlsq, individually and

collectivelyviolatedSection 760.10(1),FloridaStatute,whichrelevantpart

states:

''

. . . itisan lm lawfulem ploym entpracticeforan em ployerto

''

. . . Todischargeortofailorrefusetohireany individual,or

otherwiseto discrim inateagainstany individualwith respectto

com pensation,term s,conditions,orprivilegesofemploym ent,

because ofsuch individual'srace,color,religion,sex,national

origin,age,handicap,ormaritalstatus.''

32

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 32 of 39
120. Plaintiff asserts that the Defendantgsl, individualy and

collectively violated Title Vl1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,which

providesin relevantpart;

M m s IT ILLEGAL TO DISCRIM INATE AGAIN ST SOM EONE ON

THE BASIS OF RACE,COLOR,RELIGION,NATIONAL ORIGIN OR

SEX. THIS LAW ALSO PROTECTS EO LOYEES AGAW ST

RETALIATION FOR GOING FORW ARD W ITH A CLAN REGARDW G

DISCRIM TNATION IN TIIE W ORIA ACE.

121. PlaintiF asserts that the Defendantlsl, individually and

collectively violated Section 760.01, Florida Statute,which provides in

relevantpart:

THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROW ARD,FLORID A PROHIBITS ANY

POLICY OR PROCEDURE W IIICH RESULTS IN DISCRIM W ATION

ON THE BASISOF AGE,COLOR,DISABILITX GENDER IDENTITX

GENDER EXPRESSION, GENETIC IN FORM ATION , M ARITAL

STATUS,NATIONA L ORIGIN ,RACE,RELIGION ,SEX OR SEX UAL

ORIENTATION .

122. PlaintiF asserts that the Defendantls), individually and

collectively violated Section 440.205,Florida Statute,which provides in

relevantpart:

N O EM PLOYER SH AI.L DISCIG RGE:THREATEN TO DISCHA RG

-

E!

INTIV DATETOR COERCE AN Y EM PLOYEE BY REA SON OF SUCH

EO LOYEE'S VALID CLA IM FOR COO ENSATION OR ATTEO T

TO CLM M COW EN SATION UN DER THE W OX RS'

COM EPEN SATION LAW .

123. PlaintiF asserts that the Defendantgs), individualy and

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 33 of 39
collectively violated TitleIoftheA mericanswith DisabilitiesActof1990

(ADA),whichprovidesinrelevantpart:

M AKES IT ILLEGAL TO DISCRIM INATE AGM NST A QUALIFIED

PERSON WITH A DISABILIW FROM EMPLOYMENTOR DURING

EM PLOYG NT.

124. UnderSection 230.22(1)(2),Florida Statute,both theSchool

Board (CSBBC'')and defendantRtlncieheld afduciarydutyforeftkient

operation and improvementfortheschooldistrict,including butnotlim ited

to,enforcing,withoutdelayal1StateandFederallawspertainingtounlawful

discrimination,according Section760.10(1(a),FloridaStatute.

125. On M arch 23,2017,PlaintiF filed a grievance which alleged

that defendant Volpi's failure to investigate em ployee complaints at the

KCW building fueled the claim ed hostile work environmentwhich caused

plaintiF'sm edicalcondition to beaggravatedtothepointthatplaintiffeither

arrived late to hiswork detailornotatall,which defendantVolpifailed to

recognize oracknowledge and used such circum stancesasa toolorm eans

forunwarranted verbalorwritten reprimandsofdisciplinary write upsand

suspensionls)withouttjustcause''asrequiredbyArticle2and 15ofthe

Collective Bargaining A greem ent, FM LA and ADA ; and em ploym ent

tenuination,contrary totheapprovedFamilyMedicalLeaveAct(FMLA)

34

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 34 of 39
benefitEsqapproved by USBBCC:Adminislator Marjorie Fletcherofthe

LeavesDepartment.j110.221(2),(3),F.S.

126. A sa resultofplaintiff'ssling orattempting to fileaclaim for

retroactive com pensation for working outof classification and correlating

benefits,eachdefendantlsjunlawfullyandmaliciouslyconspiredtogetherto

orchestrate a schem e gaudulently designed to reflectapattel'n ofem ployee

disobedience,by the plaintiff in spite ofeach defendant's knowledge of

plaintiff's protec4ed FM LA status specifically with a deliberate intentto

discharged ortenminated theplaintiffwithoutjustorreasonablecausein

retaliation upon plaintiffbecause plaintiF filed internalgrievancesand of

his disclosure of unlawful conduct performed by the defendantgs),

individually andcollectively.

127. Theactionsofthedefendantls),individuallyandcollectively,

were deliberate, willful, egregious and outrageous without regard for

plaintiF'sprotectedconstim tionalz-ightsanddignity.

128. Theforegoingclahnrsjofdiscrimination,harassment,libeland

wrongfultermination by the defendants,separately and jointly,directly

affected plaintiffto thepointthatplaintiffwasforced to takesick days,so

thathe could getrelieffrom those intolerableconditionswhich aggregated

plaintiFs'2016VA diagnosisandknownmedicalconditionlsqtotheextent

35

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 35 of 39
ofbeing classified 100% disableduetothecontinuedform sofbothphysical

and em otional abuse; and unlawful conduct applied by the defendant's

individually and collectively.

129. PlaintiF asserts,thatthedefendantlslandortheiragents(sic)

willfully,maliciously and intentionally inflicted em otionaldistressupon the

plaintiffwithoutjustcausewiththeintentofharmingtheplaintiF andasa

directand proxim ate cause ofdefendant's and ortheir agents actions,the

plaintiffhasbeenirreparably harm ed.

130. Plaintiffasserts,thatthedefendantlslandortheiragents(sic)

willfully,maliciously and intentionally withoutjustcause,slandered the

plaintiFs' nam e and reputation in the work force and com m tznity by

knowingly m aldng false,m aliciously and intentionalstatem ents aboutthe

plaintiff,plaintiffs'work ethnics,dutiesandperform ance,and asadirectand

proximate causethereofthedefendant'sand ortheiragentshaveH eparably

hannedtheplaintiff.

131. Plaintifl-asserts,thatthedefendantlslandortheiragents(sic)

willfully,maliciously and intentionaly withoutjust cause,engaged in

deceitful labor violation practices and m aliciously with deliberate intent

fraudulently calculated to harm the plaintiff and to orchestrate false and

36

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 36 of 39
fraudulent evidence or inform ation and as a directand proxim ate cause

thereof,theplaintiffhasbeenirreparablyharmed.

132. Plaintifr asserts,thatas a resultofdefendants'actionsas set

forth herein,plaintiffisrequiredtoseekandtetainanattorneyandw illincur

costwhichthedefendantlslareliable.

CONCLUSIO N

As a direct and approxim ate result of the foregoing conduct,the

plaintiF hassuffered awrongfulem ploym enttermination,inviolation ofthe

CivilRightsActof1964,42U.S.C.j2000eetseq.(1964)TitleW l;42

U.S.C.j1981,j1981(a),etseq.and42 U.S.C.j1983;theCivilRightsAct

of1964,42U.S.C.j2000detseq.(1964)TitleV1;theFloridaCivilRights

Act,Florida Statute j 760.01,etseq.CTCRA'');Protection ofSchool

Speech,Fla.Stat.j1003.45059andFirstAmendment,U.S.Const.Amend.1.

DAM AGESAND RELIEFREOUESTED

W H EREFORE,based upon com pultion and calculations derived

flpm pay scalestandards,theplaintiffisthereforeentitled toanam ountofa

substantialmonetaryjudgmentandawardfrom eachdefendantassetforth

below :

Plaintiff demands monetary judgment against the defendants

individually and collectively,in the form ofeconom ic damages,including

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 37 of 39
butnotlim ited to lostwages,retroactivecom pensation;reinstatem entoff'ull

benefits,frontandbackpay;and othercom pensatory dam agesallowableby

law;costandexpense;prejudgmentandpostjudgmentinterestagainstthe

defendantsindividually and collectively.

JU RY TRIAL

PlaintiFherebydemandstrialbyjuryforalissuessoG able.

W HEREFORE,plaintiR MarloweD.Robinson,andanyotherrelief

thecourtdeemsproperandjust.

/

*wevp/,. TamishaSanchez

J'' 1 ''Go Commission#FIH41215

Y. v ccmmissinnExpires69-10-2024

#z .e' BondedThrough-Cynanotary z-o 0+

Fyu Florida-NoteryPublic

Respectfull 'ted

> R

M arlow eD .Robinson,Pro Se

Complainantg laintiff

4920N W 73Avenue

Lauderhill,FL 33319

2

Telephone:(954)934-4542

Email:marloloz@yahoo.com

STATE OFFLORIDA )

)

i COUNTY OFBROWARD )

i BEFORE M E,the undersigned authority,personally appeared,M r. I

M arlowe D .Robinson,who is personally known to m e orhas presented

FloridaDriverLicenseNumber:A/sp.sw .T5.t/as=& ,asidentification,and

statesthattheforegoingfactsandstatementsaretrueandcorrect.

SWORNANDSUBSCRIBEDTOthisqdayof.7&*z-As'/2.,2022.

38

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 38 of 39
MYCOMOSSIONEXPIRES:?//&/>DaV

vJvow Tamishasanchez NO TA PUBLIC oF FLORIDA

*6%A GocomcmomissmioisnEioxnp#ireHsH0491-1201-52024

'l'*'z' .; BondedThrotlgh-cynanotary z-olrevo% Florida-sntaryPublic

39

Case 0:22-cv-61711-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2022 Page 39 of 39