Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 1 of 23

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MIDLAND DIVISION

DEMETRIUS LEE and ROBB WILSON 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. CASE NO.___________________

CITY OF MIDLAND, TEXAS, 

SETH HERMAN and KYLE SULLIVAN Jury Requested

Defendants. 

PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS, 

RACIAL DISCRIMINATIONAND RETALIATION

TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:

Plaintiffs, DEMETRIUS LEE, (“LEE”) and ROBB WILSON (“WILSON”) by and 

through the undersigned counsel, sues the Defendants, CITY OF MIDLAND, a Texas

municipality, SETH HERMAN and KYLE SULLIVAN, and, for cause of action, states as 

follows: 

I. INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief and damages alleging the 

Defendants discriminated against LEE and WILSON on the basis of race, and further unlawfully 

retaliated against LEE and WILSON when they reasonably opposed Defendants’ discriminatory 

treatment. Additionally, this is a civil rights action for money damages arising under the 

Constitution of the United States, particularly the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to 

the United States Constitution, the laws of the United States, particularly the Civil Rights Act, 42 

U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, and the laws of the State of Texas. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 1 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 2 of 23

2. On or about November 19, 2018, LEE filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging the defendant discriminated against him 

on the basis of race and further committed retaliatory conduct.

3. On or about December 5, 2018, WILSON filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging the defendant discriminated against him 

on the basis of race and further committed retaliatory conduct. Because of the work share 

agreement between the Texas Commission on Human Rights (“TCHR”) and the EEOC, 

Plaintiff’s claims were dually filed with the TCHR. 

4. On October 7, 2019, the EEOC issued and a “Notice of Suit Rights” letter to LEE. 

(See attached Exhibit “A”). On October 4, 2019, the EEOC issued and mailed a “Notice of Suit 

Rights” letter to WILSON. (See attached Exhibit “B”). Due to a backlog, there was a delay in 

forwarding these letters to the Plaintiffs.

5. LEE received the right to sue letter on or about October 28, 2019. WILSON received 

his right to sue letter on October 28, 2019.

6. The ninetieth day after receipt of that letter is January 26, 2020. 

7. This suit is filed within 90 days of receipt of EEOC's right-to-sue letter and is timely. 

8. LEE and WILSON have therefore exhausted all administrative procedure prerequisite 

to bringing this case to Court. 

II. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

9. Plaintiffs respectfully demand a jury trial of all issues of fact in this case. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 2 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 3 of 23

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

10. This Court has jurisdiction over the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, §1343, and 

§1367. 

11. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Title VII and rights secured by the 

Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended in 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq.; 42 U.S.C. §1983; the 

Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States; the Texas Commission on 

Human Rights Act, TEX. LAB. CODE § 21.001, et. seq., and § 554.003, TEX. GOV’T CODE, among 

other laws. 

12. The venue of this action is properly placed in the Western District of Texas, Midland

Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b), because the events/employment practices alleged to be 

unlawful were committed in Midland County, Texas, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable 

Court. 

IV. PARTIES

13. LEE and WILSON are both African American and are members of a class of persons 

protected from discrimination in their employment under Title VII and rights secured by the 

Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended in 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq.; 42 U.S.C. §1983; the 

Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States; and the Texas Commission on 

Human Rights Act. 

14. Defendant MIDLAND is a Texas municipality organized and existing under the 

laws of the State of Texas, in Midland County, Texas, and within the jurisdiction of this Court. 

Defendant Midland may be served with citation in this matter by serving its chief executive 

officer:

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 3 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 4 of 23

Amy Turner

City Secretary

CITY OF MIDLAND

300 N. Lorraine Street

Midland, Texas 79702

15. Defendant SETH HERMAN is, and at all times material hereto was the chief of 

police of MIDLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT. SETH HERMAN may be served with process 

in this case at his office address:

SETH HERMAN

c/o MIDLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT

601 N. Lorraine St

Midland, TX 79701

16. Defendant KYLE SULLIVAN is, and at all times material hereto was an 

employee or representative of the MIDLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT. KYLE SULLIVAN 

may be served with process in this case at his office address:

KYLE SULLIVAN

c/o MIDLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT

601 N. Lorraine St

Midland, TX 79701

17. At all times material to this action, Defendant MIDLAND operated and exercised 

control over, among other things, MIDLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT (“MPD”), in Midland

County, Texas. At all times material to this action, Defendant MIDLAND was an “employer” 

within the meaning of Section 42 U.S.C. §§1983 and 2000e. 

18. At all times material to this action, LEE and WILSON were “employees” within 

the meaning of 42 U.S.C. §§1983 and 2000e. 

19. At all times material to this action, Defendant, MIDLAND, employed more than 

fifteen employees and MIDLAND was Plaintiff’s employer within the meaning of Title VII, as 

amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000(a) to (b). 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 4 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 5 of 23

20. At all times material to this action, Defendant MIDLAND exercised power and 

control, and was the final policy maker with respect to the policies, practices and procedures

maintained by the MPD, including those that are the subject of this Complaint. 

21. At all times material to this action, WILSON and LEE were employed by 

MIDLAND/MPD and the parties had a contractual relationship with each other. 

22. At all material to this action, WILSON was and continues to be qualified for the 

position held with the Defendant. 

23. WILSON is a resident of Tarrant County, Texas. At all times material hereto, 

WILSON was a resident Midland County, and resided in said County during the time of his 

employment with the Defendant MPD, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. 

24. LEE is a resident of Midland County, Texas. LEE resided in Midland County, 

Texas during the time of his employment with the Defendant MPD, within the jurisdiction of this 

Honorable Court. 

25. Defendant, MIDLAND/MPD, is and was responsible for the acts of its command 

staff, supervisors and officers, including HERMAN and SULLIVAN, who were acting within 

the scope of their employment, and under the color of law pursuant to a policy, custom and/or 

practice of race and/or religious discrimination, and violations of individuals' equal protection 

under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. 

26. At all times material to this action, until Defendant began harassing and 

retaliating against Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ job performance was satisfactory or above satisfactory. 

27. MPD employed fewer than ten African American police officers at all times 

material hereto, LEE and WILSON were two of those officers.

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 5 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 6 of 23

28. At all times relevant and material, Defendant MIDLAND/MPD acted under color 

of law. 

V. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 

29. LEE had been employed at the City of Midland Police Department since August 

13, 2007. In the intervening time, LEE rose through the ranks, serving as a Patrol Officer, a Field 

Training Officer in the Patrol Division, a Property Detective, and a Sergeant in the Traffic 

Division. Throughout his employment he earned positive reviews. That began to change, 

however, with the elevation of Seth Herman and Kyle Sullivan within the police ranks. In 

March, 2018, Herman was elevated to Interim Chief, and began new efforts to discriminate 

against LEE and subject him to invidious treatment for prior complaints that LEE had filed 

against him. 

30. On or about April 11, 2018, upon information and belief of the Plaintiffs, 

DEFENDANT HERMAN directed DEFENDANT SULLIVAN to initiate an internal affairs 

complaint against LEE for running a driver’s license check on an individual, regardless of the 

fact that LEE had a legitimate reason for doing so. Although it has been regular course of 

business for individuals within the MPD to run driver’s license checks on individuals when they 

have a need to do so, or the subject has requested it, LEE was singled out for discipline on this 

matter, ostensibly at the direction of Herman. 

31. On April 12, 2018, LEE had a closed door conference with SULLIVAN, where 

they discussed the investigation, and LEE mentioned the name of another police officer, 

Detective Geo Mitchell, who had been causing problems for LEE. This information was related 

to SULLIVAN in confidence. On April 18, 2018, Officer WILSON reported to LEE that he had 

had a conversation with Mitchell about LEE. Mitchell warned WILSON to be “careful about the 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 6 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 7 of 23

company he keeps,” and said that “the white man” told him (Mitchell) that LEE had (Mitchell’s) 

name in his mouth. 

32. On May 5, 2018, Parking Enforcement Officer WILSON asked LEE to run his 

computerized criminal history(CCH). LEE initiated the check, obtaining a copy of the criminal 

history. On May 7, 2018, LEE was contacted by Sullivan to ask if he had run WILSON’s CCH. 

LEE indicated affirmatively, but stated that it was within his authorization to do so since he had 

the subject’s consent. Sullivan nevertheless deemed it a violation of general orders. 

33. On May 22, 2018, LEE reached out to his City Councilman, John B. Love, III, 

asking to discuss his situation with Councilman Love, and notifying him that he believe that he 

had been subjected to a hostile working environment on the basis of race. On May 29, 2018, 

Councilman Love asked to meet with LEE and the Mayor, which LEE agreed to do. LEE and 

WILSON both met with Love, the Mayor of the City of Midland, and City Prosecutors, and 

reported to them various items of illegal and questionable conduct that had been occurring in the 

City of Midland Police Department, including racial discrimination and disparate treatment of 

officers, unfounded internal affairs investigations, and acts of retaliation, amongst other things.

Subsequent to that meeting, the internal affairs division began an investigation against LEE on 

pretextual charges, and disciplined him for alleged policy violations, including initiating criminal 

prosecution against him. He was suspended as a result of their investigation, and later resigned 

under duress, resulting from the hostile working environment. 

34. Beginning in April 2017, ROBB WILSON became employed at the City of 

Midland Police Department. Although he was qualified for a position as a police officer, 

WILSON was told that he would only be employed as a Parking Enforcement Officer in the 

Downtown Sector. He was thus limited in his pay and opportunity for advancement, although 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 7 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 8 of 23

other individuals, with lesser qualifications, were hired by and advanced within the Midland 

Police Department. Wilson was also limited in his ability to qualify for and obtain outside 

employment. Nevertheless, although WILSON was limited in his employment to a Parking 

Enforcement Officer, he was regularly instructed to perform duties commensurate with a Police 

Officer, and for which Parking Control Officers were not to be used. 

35. On multiple occasions, WILSON was disciplined for violation of General Orders, 

although he had never received a copy of the General Orders, and had never been trained on 

them. WILSON was further instructed to respond to assist traffic control, to work accidents, and 

to respond to fatality accidents, even though WILSON did not have the proper training, and, as a 

Parking Enforcement Officer, was neither paid nor properly equipped to do the work which he 

was instructed to do, but Defendants nevertheless instructed him to do that work, knowing that 

he was paid and trained far less than his counterparts were, and far less than he should have been, 

for doing the job which they expected to do. Defendants intentionally undertrained and 

underpaid WILSON in an effort to exploit his minority and protected status.

36. When WILSON cooperated with LEE in attending the meeting with the 

Councilman, Mayor, and City Prosecutors, Defendants MIDLAND, SETH HERMAN, and 

KYLE SULLIVAN “turned up the heat” on WILSON, retaliating against him for his efforts to 

report the illegal and unethical activity occurring at the Midland Police Department, ultimately 

resulting in his separation from the Midland Police Department.

VI. CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. § 1983 DISCRIMINATORY CUSTOM CLAIM AGAINST 

MIDLAND/MPD

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 8 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 9 of 23

37. LEE and WILSON re-allege every factual allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-36 of 

this complaint. 

38. The discriminatory acts of which LEE and WILSON complain, including those 

incidents and conduct described in the Factual Allegations above, were performed pursuant to a 

larger custom, policy or practice of discrimination maintained by Defendant in violation of 42 

U.S.C.A. §1983. 

39. At all times relevant, Defendant MIDLAND maintained a widespread custom, policy, 

or practice of race discrimination, and harassment based on race, inter alia, that is so permanent 

and well settled as to constitute a "custom or usage" with the force or effect of law. 

40. This discriminatory custom, policy or practice referred to in the above paragraph was a 

proximate cause of Plaintiffs' injuries. 

41. Defendant had a custom, policy or practice of condoning or tacitly authorizing 

discrimination on the basis of race by supervisors and officers against employees who were of 

African American descent, including Plaintiffs. 

42. Furthermore, Defendant was aware of the discriminatory acts of which Plaintiff 

complains, but acted with deliberate indifference to the conduct and did nothing about it. 

43. Defendant MIDLAND/MPD knew or should have known of the discriminatory 

conduct because plaintiff complained to superior officers who had an obligation to advise 

Defendant of such conduct. 

44. Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, through the actions of their agents or employees, 

disregarded the requirements to conduct a genuine investigation and remedy claims of 

discrimination. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 9 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 10 of 23

45. Moreover, LEE and WILSON, through their commanding officers, filed formal 

complaints with the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD alleging that his supervisors and co-workers 

identified above had created a hostile work environment and committed discriminatory conduct 

against LEE and WILSON because of their race.

46. Because of the filing of a formal complaint, Defendant MIDLAND/MPD were 

required to conduct and Internal Administrative Investigation to determine if any of the 

allegations was accurate. 

47. However, Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, at the direction of HERMAN and 

SULLIVAN, conducted sham investigations or ignored Plaintiffs’ complaints thus evidencing 

systemic prejudice and discrimination in the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD’s police force and 

administrative offices. 

48. Defendant MIDLAND’s custom, policy or practice of ignoring and/or rejecting 

complaints of discrimination on the basis of race was a proximate cause of Plaintiffs’ injuries. 

49. Defendant had a custom, policy or practice of failing to properly train employees in 

matters of race and diversity training. 

50. Defendant's custom, policy or practice of failing to properly train its employees was a 

proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries. 

51. Defendant had a custom, policy or practice of treating employees who are of African 

American descent differently from employees who are not of African American descent. 

52. For example, Plaintiffs were subjected to numerous offensive, inappropriate and 

derogatory remarks, jokes and name-calling while Caucasian employees were not. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 10 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 11 of 23

53. Plaintiffs’ complaints of harassment and discrimination were disregarded or ignored 

while the complaints made by employees who were not African American descent were not 

disregarded or ignored 

54. The rules were applied more harshly to employees who were African American 

descent than they were to employees who were not African American descent. 

55. Employees who were African American descent were subjected to greater 

scrutiny than were employees who were not African American descent. 

56. Employees who were African American descent were held to a different standard 

than those employees who were not African American descent. 

57. Employees who were African American descent were scored more harshly on 

their evaluations than employees who were not African American descent. 

58. Employees who were African American descent were criticized more harshly on 

their evaluations than employees who were not African American descent. 

59. Employees who were African American descent were not afforded the same 

terms, conditions and privileges of employment as were employees who were not African 

American. 

60. Additionally, employees who were African American descent were treated less 

favorably than employees who were not African American descent. 

61. Defendant's custom, policy or practice of treating employees who were African 

American descent differently from employees who were not African American descent was the 

proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 11 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 12 of 23

62. Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ constitutional injuries were caused by Defendant 

MIDLAND who is a final policy maker under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 with respect to certain terms 

and conditions of Plaintiff's job. 

63. At all times material to this action, Defendant MIDLAND’s employees exhibiting 

discriminatory conduct towards Plaintiffs were all in a position that possessed the authority to 

affect the terms, conditions, and privileges of Plaintiffs' employment with the Defendant

MIDLAND/MPD . The actions, failure to act and language of Defendant was so severe and 

pervasive as to alter the terms, conditions and/or privileges of their employment with the 

Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, and thereby created a hostile work environment. 

64. WILSON would have received a pay raise and an assignment as a Police Officer 

but for the discriminatory conduct of the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD. 

65. The discrimination was based upon WILSON’s race, in that but for the fact that 

WILSON is of African American origin, he would not have been the object of discrimination. 

66. As a result of the actions and failure to act when a non-discriminatory employer 

would act, of the Defendant, as alleged herein, WILSON has been the victim of negative 

employment actions and has been exposed to ridicule and embarrassments and he has suffered 

emotional distress and damage. 

67. Both Plaintiffs, by being subjected to this hostile and offensive work environment 

created by the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD and ignored by management were unreasonably 

affected in a term, condition, or privilege of employment under applicable law in that their 

psychological well- being was seriously affected when the work place became hostile. 

68. The conduct of the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, by and through the conduct of 

its agents, employees, and/or representatives, and the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD 's failure to 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 12 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 13 of 23

make prompt remedial action to prevent continued discrimination against Plaintiffs, deprived 

Plaintiffs of their statutory right under federal law. 

69. The actions of the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, HERMAN, SULLIVAN, and/or 

their agents were willful, wanton, and intentional and with malice or reckless indifference to 

Plaintiffs’ statutorily protected rights, thus entitling Plaintiffs to damages in the form of 

compensatory and punitive damages pursuant to federal law, to punish the Defendant

MIDLAND/MPD for their actions and to deter them, and others, from such action in the future. 

70. Plaintiffs have suffered and will continue to suffer both irreparable injury and 

compensable damages as a result of the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD’s discriminatory practices 

unless and until this Court grants relief. 

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF TITLE VII DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RACE AGAINST 

MIDLAND/MPD

71. Plaintiffs re-allege every factual allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-70 of this 

complaint. Plaintiffs are members of a protected class, African American descent. Plaintiffs have

been employed by Defendant, MIDLAND/MPD, since receiving their first offers of 

employment. 

72. During the course of Plaintiffs’ employment with Defendant MIDLAND, Plaintiffs 

have been subjected to a discriminatory, hostile and offensive work environment because of their

race, as more fully described in the Factual Allegations and in Count I of this Complaint. 

73. The environment referred to in the above paragraph of this Complaint included, but 

was not limited to: adverse disciplinary action initiated against them to which other non-minority 

officers were not subjected, being held to a higher standard than non-minority officers and 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 13 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 14 of 23

subjected to harsher working conditions than non-minority officers, and being subjected to 

negative, defamatory and injuries comments, such as Chief SETH HERMAN’s deliberate and 

dramatic cutting of DEMETRIUS LEE’s badge upon the termination of his employment and 

posting it as a boast for all to see that he “had gotten” LEE.

74. Defendant MIDLAND/MPD allowing Lt Sullivan to fabricate alleged evidence of 

misconduct in an effort to have Plaintiffs ultimately decertified as law enforcement officers. In 

addition to the above: 

75. Plaintiff WILSON was denied a position as a Police Officer when employees who 

were not African American were offered the position; 

76. The complaints of harassment and discrimination made by Plaintiffs were 

disregarded or ignored while the complaints made by employees who were not African 

American descent were not disregarded or ignored. 

77. The rules were applied more harshly to Plaintiffs than they were to employees who 

were not African American descent. 

78. Plaintiffs were subjected to greater scrutiny than were employees who were not 

African American descent. 

79. Plaintiffs were held to a different standard than those employees who were not 

African American descent. 

80. Plaintiffs were scored more harshly on their evaluations than employees who were 

not of African American descent. 

81. Plaintiffs were criticized more harshly on their evaluations than employees who 

were not of African American descent. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 14 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 15 of 23

82. Plaintiffs were not afforded the same terms, conditions and privileges of 

employment as were employees who were not African American descent. 

83. Additionally, Plaintiffs were treated less favorably than employees who were not 

African American descent. 

84. Plaintiff were subjected to the conduct referred to in this Complaint because 

Plaintiffs are of African American descent. 

85. Similarly situated employees who were not of African American descent were not 

subjected to the conduct referred to in this Complaint.

86. Much of the conduct referred to in this Complaint was done in the presence of 

officers, superior officers, citizens and arrestees. 

87. As a result of the offensive, derogatory, and discriminatory comments, particularly 

in the presence of other officers and civilians, Plaintiffs’ authority as police officer and traffic 

enforcement officer, respectively, were undermined which interfered with Plaintiffs’ ability to 

perform their job and jeopardized their safety. 

88. Despite Plaintiffs’ formal complaints to Defendant MIDLAND/MPD through their

commanding officers, the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD failed and refused to take any action to 

correct the offensive and discriminatory conduct.

89. The discriminatory acts and environment described in this Complaint were 

otherwise known by Defendant MIDLAND/MPD. 

90. Despite Plaintiffs’ complaints referred to in this Complaint, Defendant took no 

appropriate remedial action. 

91. Defendant’s discriminatory behavior was part of a custom, pattern and practice of 

unlawful harassment and discrimination of employees of African American descent.

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 15 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 16 of 23

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiffs have suffered embarrassment, 

humiliation, emotional distress, and other forms of damage. 

92. Plaintiffs have suffered damages of an on-going and continuous nature. 

COUNT III VIOLATION OF TITLE VII RETALIATION BY DEFENDANT

106. Plaintiffs re-alleges every factual allegation as stated in paragraph 1-92 of this 

complaint. 

107. Title VII, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-3(a), prohibits covered employers from taking 

reprisal against an employee for complaining about practices which the employee reasonably and 

in good faith believes are discriminatory. 

108. Plaintiffs, consistently during their employment, opposed employment practices 

which they reasonably believed were discriminatory. 

109. Defendant, MIDLAND/MPD, by and through its supervisory employees,

HERMAN and SULLIVAN retaliated against Plaintiffs because of this opposition by scoring 

their evaluations more harshly, denying them promotions and other positions after they 

complained of these and other discriminatory conduct. 

110. By taking these and other actions against them, MIDLAND/MPD, HERMAN and 

SULLIVAN committed unlawful reprisal against Plaintiffs in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C.A. 

§ 2000e-3(a).

111. MIDLAND/MPD's HERMAN’s and SULLIVAN’s wrongful and malicious 

actions as alleged in the preceding paragraphs caused Plaintiffs considerable financial injury and 

great mental distress and were done with reckless indifference to Plaintiffs’ constitutional right 

to oppose discriminatory practices. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 16 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 17 of 23

COUNT IV

VIOLATION OF TEXAS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RACE

115. Plaintiffs re-allege every factual allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-98 of this 

complaint. 

116. At all times material to this action, Defendants conducted unlawful employment 

practices against Plaintiffs by discriminating against them and by allowing their employees to 

discriminate against them on the basis of Plaintiffs being individuals of African American race. 

117. At all relevant times mentioned in this Complaint, including the discriminatory 

conduct of the Defendant’s administration and employees, Defendants MIDLAND/MPD, 

HERMAN and SULLIVAN were aware that Plaintiffs are and were African American 

individuals. 

102. At the time Defendants MIDLAND/MPD, HERMAN and SULLIVAN took 

negative employment action against Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs did perform and excel at the 

performance of the essential functions of their positions. 

103. Plaintiffs were qualified for the position held with the Defendant 

MIDLAND/MPD. 

104. Plaintiffs were denied pay raises and additional appointments or positions and 

treated differently from other employees by their supervisors working for Defendant 

MIDLAND/MPD on the basis of race. 

105. The negative employment actions of Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, HERMAN and 

SULLIVAN against Plaintiffs and other acts were directly and proximately caused by the 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 17 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 18 of 23

Defendant’s unjustified discrimination against Plaintiffs because of their race while working for 

Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, violated §22.001, et seq., TEXAS LABOR CODE.

112. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant MIDLAND/MPD's intentional 

conduct, Plaintiffs suffered serious economic losses as well as mental pain and suffering. 

113. Any alleged nondiscriminatory reason for this treatment of Plaintiffs asserted by

Defendant is a mere pretext for the actual reason for the Defendant’s negative employment

actions, their race.

114. The Defendant MIDLAND/MPD's actions were malicious and were recklessly 

indifferent to PLAINITFFS’s rights pursuant to Texas Law protecting a person from 

discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, race, age, handicap, or marital status.

118. The aforementioned actions of Defendant MIDLAND/MPD, HERMAN and 

SULLIVAN were done wantonly, willfully, maliciously, and with reckless disregard of the 

consequences of such actions. 

COUNT V

VIOLATION OF TEXAS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ACT - RETALIATION BY 

DEFENDANTS

119. Plaintiffs re-allege every factual allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-118 of this 

complaint. 

120. The Texas Labor Code prohibits covered employers from taking reprisal against 

an employee for complaining about practices which the employee reasonably and in good faith 

believes are discriminatory. 

121. Plaintiffs, consistently during their employment, opposed employment practices 

which they reasonably believed were discriminatory. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 18 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 19 of 23

122. Defendant, MIDLAND/MPD, HERMAN and SULLIVAN by and through its 

supervisory employees, retaliated against Plaintiffs because of this opposition by scoring their 

evaluations more harshly, denying them training based upon their performance reviews, denying 

them promotions and additional positions, and initiating unfounded internal affairs complaints 

against them after they complained of these and other discriminatory conduct. 

123. By taking these and other actions against him, MIDLAND/MPD, HERMAN and 

SULLIVAN committed unlawful reprisal against Plaintiffs in violation of the Texas Labor Code. 

124. MIDLAND/MPD's, HERMAN’s and SULLIVAN’s wrongful and malicious 

actions as alleged in the preceding paragraphs caused Plaintiffs considerable financial injury and 

great mental distress and were done with reckless indifference to Plaintiffs’ constitutional right to 

oppose discriminatory practices. 

COUNT VI

DEPRIVATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES

125. Plaintiffs re-allege every factual allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-124 of this 

complaint. 

126. Plaintiffs are entitled to equal protection of the laws of the United States and the 

State of Texas under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and due 

process law under the Fifth Amendment, which applies to the states through the Due Process 

Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Plaintiffs are also entitled to freedom of speech under the 

First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

127. Defendants MIDLAND, and SETH HERMAN and KYLE SULLIVAN, acting 

under color of state law, discriminated against Plaintiffs on the basis of their race, and by failing 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 19 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 20 of 23

to prevent or ameliorate the hostile conditions that they had actual knowledge of, which led to the 

harassment and retaliation toward Plaintiffs, and deprived them of their right to equal protection.

128. Further, HERMAN and SULLIVAN personally imposed a hostile work 

environment on Plaintiffs in which they ultimately suffered the loss of their employment, and 

adverse employment actions against them, refusal of opportunities to advance, and hostile 

treatment. 

129. Plaintiffs, as citizens of the United States and as MIDLAND employees, were 

entitled to due process protection of freedom from arbitrary action that jeopardized their property 

interest in their public employee jobs, and thus they should not have been arbitrarily subjected to 

the fear of losing their jobs for speaking out. HERMAN and SULLIVAN’s actions deprived 

Plaintiffs of their due process liberty interest guaranteed to them by the United States 

Constitution.

130. Plaintiffs, as citizens of the United States and as MIDLAND employees, further 

were guaranteed freedom of speech by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, 

made applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. By subjecting the Plaintiffs to 

retaliation and punishment for reporting of the discriminatory and unethical conditions at the 

Midland Police Department, Defendants punished Plaintiffs for activity that is absolutely 

protected under the First Amendment. 

131. The above-described actions of HERMAN and SULLIVAN were undertaken 

while they were acting under color of state law.

COUNT VII

CONSPIRACY TO DEPRIVE PERSONS OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 20 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 21 of 23

132. Plaintiffs re-allege every factual allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-131 of this 

complaint. 

133. Defendants HERMAN and SULLIVAN conspired together and with others, 

currently unknown to Plaintiffs, to deprive Plaintiffs of equal protection of the laws and of equal 

privileges and immunities of the laws of the United States and the State of Texas, as set forth 

above. 

134. The conspirators committed some acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, which 

included actively initiating Internal Affairs complaints against the Plaintiffs, as well as by 

engaging in a pattern and course of conduct to intimidate the Plaintiffs and other witnesses within 

the department.

135. Further, upon information and belief, Plaintiffs would show that HERMAN and 

SULLIVAN actively initiated a campaign designed to eliminate Plaintiffs from employment with 

MIDLAND, in retaliation and punishment for their speaking out on the illegal activity occurring 

within the department. Such campaign included attempting to isolate Plaintiffs from associating 

with others, initiating unwarranted investigations against them, and, eventually, termination of 

Plaintiff LEE’s employment with the Department. 

136. As a result of this conspiracy, Plaintiffs were injured by the Defendants and were 

deprived of having and exercising her Constitutional Rights, as more fully set forth herein.

COUNT VIII

FIRST AMENDMENT RETALIATION 

137. Plaintiffs re-allege every factual allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-136 of this 

complaint. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 21 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 22 of 23

138. As discussed above, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, MIDLAND, HERMAN and

SULLIVAN violated Plaintiffs right to free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the 

United States Constitution. 

139. Plaintiffs (1) made reports of unlawful and discriminatory action on the part of the 

Defendants, and (2) were disciplined and subject to retaliatory treatment for making the report 

though performing their duties in a professional manner and following Defendants’ policies and 

procedures. 

140. The adverse employment actions against Plaintiffs were conducted under color of 

state law, ordinance, regulation and custom or usage. Further, Defendants HERMAN and 

SULLIVAN approved and/or failed to stop the adverse employment act(s), failed to correct the 

adverse employment acts and/or condoned and ratified the adverse employment act(s).

VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

141. For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs individually ask for judgment against 

Defendants for the following:

a. Actual damages in an amount to be proved at trial;

b. Exemplary Damages against HERMAN and SULLIVAN in their individual 

capacity, as determined by the jury;

c. Enjoin Defendant from discriminating, harassing, and retaliating against Plaintiffs

and any other similarly situated employee; 

d. Grant such other and further equitable relief as this court deems equitable and just 

and/or available pursuant to Federal Law including punitive damages; 

e. Award Plaintiffs prejudgment and postjudgment interest;

f. Award Plaintiffs costs of suit, including attorneys fees; and

g. All other, further, and different relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 22 of 35
Demetrius Lee & Robb Wilson vs. City of Midland, et. al. 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint

Page 23 of 23

DATED this 26th day of January, 2020.

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Robert S. Hogan

Robert S. Hogan

State Bar No. 00796767

HOGAN LAW FIRM, PC

1210 Avenue R

P.O. Box 2277

Lubbock, TX 79401

Telephone: (806) 771-7900

Facsimile: (806) 771-7925

email: rob@hoganlaw.com

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 23 of 35


From: Catalan Lopez,Wendy wendy.catalan@twc.state.tx.us

Subject: RE: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Date: October 28, 2019 at 4:45 PM

To: rob@hoganlaw.com

Cc: Lewis,Myron myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Mr. Hogan,

We are currently experiencing backlog, so I apologize for the delay in mailing. Attached please find the Right to Sue letters for your

clients. You may use today as the date of receipt.

Thanks,

Wendy Catalan

Administrative Assistant IV

Civil Rights Division

Texas Workforce Commission

Phone: (512) 463-4475

From: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> 

Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 10:45 AM

To: Catalan Lopez,Wendy <wendy.catalan@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: FW: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Wilson, Robbie 1A19543

Lee, Demetrius 1A19561

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

From: Robert S. Hogan <rob@hoganlaw.com> 

Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 9:49 PM

To: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: Re: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Yes, they have not arrived

Robert S. Hogan

Attorney 

HOGAN LAW FIRM, PC

Licensed in TX, NM & CO

1210 Avenue R | Lubbock, TX 79401

Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2277 (79408)

Tel (806) 771-7900 | Fax (806) 771-7925

Toll Free (877) 771-8472

website | vCard | map | email

Life Member

THE MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

THE MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

The Top Trial Lawyers In America®

Robert S. Hogan is an attorney licensed in Texas, New Mexico, & Colorado. This communication and any attachments to it

are confidential and intended solely for the use of the person(s) to whom they are addressed. This e-mail transmission may

contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us by

telephone immediately at 806.771.7900, and you are notified that any disclosure, distribution, or the taking of any action in

reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. Unless expressly stated to the contrary, nothing in this email

message may be construed as a digital or electronic signature of any employee of the Hogan Law Firm. The Hogan Law

Firm automatically blocks e-mails containing objectionable language or suspicious content. Messages sent to the Hogan

Law Firm should be considered received only if confirmed by a return receipt. Please be advised that an attorney-client

relationship cannot be created between any prospective client and the Hogan Law Firm without a signed attorney

employment contract.

On Oct 25, 2019, at 8:17 PM, Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> wrote:

 You should have them by now. Reach out to me on Monday morning if you haven’t received them, I will send you a

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 26 of 35
 You should have them by now. Reach out to me on Monday morning if you haven’t received them, I will send you a

scanned copy. I apologize in advance, I will check with my admin section to find the answer for this issue.

From: Robert S. Hogan <rob@hoganlaw.com>

Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 3:43:09 PM

To: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: Re: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Dear Mr. Lewis,

I never have received the Notice of Right to Sue letters on Robb Wilson or on Demetrius Lee. Please advise as to the

status of these letters, and when we should expect them.

Thank you,

Rob Hogan

On Sep 18, 2019, at 10:04 AM, Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> wrote:

Mr. Hogan,

I received both documents and these will work just fine. I will get on the admin portion tomorrow. The Right to

Sue documents should hit your mailbox next week. Thanks.

Just as a note, remember that the investigation continues until the request gets to our office. Without that

document and the investigation continuing, you run the risk of the investigator completing the investigation

and recommending “No Cause” which could damage your efforts as the Complainant’s Attorney. Hope this

clarifies any misconceptions. Thanks again.

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

From: Robert Hogan <rob@hoganlaw.com>

Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 9:47 AM

To: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: Re: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Importance: High

CAUTION: Email not from TWC System. Use care when clicking links and opening

attachments.

Dear Mr. Lewis,

Attached is the Request for Right to Sue Letter. Please advise if you need anything further from me.

Thanks,

Rob Hogan

Robert S. Hogan

Attorney

<image001.jpg>

HOGAN LAW FIRM, PC

Licensed in TX, NM & CO

1210 Avenue R | Lubbock, TX 79401

Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2277 (79408)

Tel (806) 771-7900 | Fax (806) 771-7925

Toll Free (877) 771-8472

website | vCard | map | email <image002.jpg><image002.jpg><image002.jpg><image002.jpg><image002.jpg>

<image003.jpg><image003.jpg><image004.jpg>

Life Member

THE MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

THE MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

The Top Trial Lawyers In America®

Robert S. Hogan is an attorney licensed in Texas, New Mexico, & Colorado. This communication and any attachments to it are confidential and

intended solely for the use of the person(s) to whom they are addressed. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information that is

legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us by telephone immediately at 806.771.7900, and you are notified that

any disclosure, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. Unless expressly stated to the

contrary, nothing in this email message may be construed as a digital or electronic signature of any employee of the Hogan Law Firm. The

Hogan Law Firm automatically blocks e-mails containing objectionable language or suspicious content. Messages sent to the Hogan Law Firm

should be considered received only if confirmed by a return receipt. Please be advised that an attorney-client relationship cannot be created

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 27 of 35
should be considered received only if confirmed by a return receipt. Please be advised that an attorney-client relationship cannot be created

between any prospective client and the Hogan Law Firm without a signed attorney employment contract.

On Sep 10, 2019, at 7:07 AM, Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> wrote:

Mr. Hogan, just a reminder. I need the Request for Right to Sue on Lee and Wilson.

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

From: Lewis,Myron

Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 10:28 AM

To: rob@hoganlaw.com

Subject: RE: Lee v Midland Police Department TWCCRD 1A19561 EEOC 31C-2019-00390

Mr. Hogan,

Here are the 180 day letters for Wilson. Mr. Lee already received his via certified mail, but if you

need a copy of it let me know and I will forward you a copy. As soon as I receive your Right to

Sue request I will close out the investigation on this side so you can have control of the case.

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

“Tell Me, I Will Forget”

 “Show Me, I Might Remember”

 “Involve Me, I Will Understand”

From: Lewis,Myron

Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 5:24 PM

To: rob@hoganlaw.com

Subject: Lee v Midland Police Department TWCCRD 1A19561 EEOC 31C-2019-00390

Importance: High

Good Morning Mr. Hogan,

My name is Myron Lewis and I would like to introduce myself to you as the assigned Investigator

for the case with Lee v Midland Police Department. If you need to contact me in reference to this

case my information is provided for your convenience. Please send me an email or give me a call

to verify receipt of this email, I will be contacting you soon to schedule an interview. Thank you for

your time and please reply to this email for all future email contact. My hours of availability

are Mon – Thurs 7:00am to 5:00pm please call if you have questions or need information about

your case.

I have sent your client the 180 day letter that explains the Right to Sue from Civil Rights Division.

If you would like to proceed on your ability to exercise the Right to Sue just send me an email on

your email account with your contact information requesting it and I will process the action

quickly. Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing from you. 

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

“Tell Me, I Will Forget”

 “Show Me, I Might Remember”

 “Involve Me, I Will Understand”

Robbie D. 

Wilson.pdf

Demetrius 

Lee.pdf

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 28 of 35
Robbie D. 

Wilson.pdf

Demetrius 

Lee.pdf

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 29 of 35


From: Catalan Lopez,Wendy wendy.catalan@twc.state.tx.us

Subject: RE: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Date: October 28, 2019 at 4:45 PM

To: rob@hoganlaw.com

Cc: Lewis,Myron myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Mr. Hogan,

We are currently experiencing backlog, so I apologize for the delay in mailing. Attached please find the Right to Sue letters for your

clients. You may use today as the date of receipt.

Thanks,

Wendy Catalan

Administrative Assistant IV

Civil Rights Division

Texas Workforce Commission

Phone: (512) 463-4475

From: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> 

Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 10:45 AM

To: Catalan Lopez,Wendy <wendy.catalan@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: FW: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Wilson, Robbie 1A19543

Lee, Demetrius 1A19561

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

From: Robert S. Hogan <rob@hoganlaw.com> 

Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 9:49 PM

To: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: Re: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Yes, they have not arrived

Robert S. Hogan

Attorney 

HOGAN LAW FIRM, PC

Licensed in TX, NM & CO

1210 Avenue R | Lubbock, TX 79401

Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2277 (79408)

Tel (806) 771-7900 | Fax (806) 771-7925

Toll Free (877) 771-8472

website | vCard | map | email

Life Member

THE MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

THE MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

The Top Trial Lawyers In America®

Robert S. Hogan is an attorney licensed in Texas, New Mexico, & Colorado. This communication and any attachments to it

are confidential and intended solely for the use of the person(s) to whom they are addressed. This e-mail transmission may

contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us by

telephone immediately at 806.771.7900, and you are notified that any disclosure, distribution, or the taking of any action in

reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. Unless expressly stated to the contrary, nothing in this email

message may be construed as a digital or electronic signature of any employee of the Hogan Law Firm. The Hogan Law

Firm automatically blocks e-mails containing objectionable language or suspicious content. Messages sent to the Hogan

Law Firm should be considered received only if confirmed by a return receipt. Please be advised that an attorney-client

relationship cannot be created between any prospective client and the Hogan Law Firm without a signed attorney

employment contract.

On Oct 25, 2019, at 8:17 PM, Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> wrote:

 You should have them by now. Reach out to me on Monday morning if you haven’t received them, I will send you a

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 32 of 35
 You should have them by now. Reach out to me on Monday morning if you haven’t received them, I will send you a

scanned copy. I apologize in advance, I will check with my admin section to find the answer for this issue.

From: Robert S. Hogan <rob@hoganlaw.com>

Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 3:43:09 PM

To: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: Re: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Dear Mr. Lewis,

I never have received the Notice of Right to Sue letters on Robb Wilson or on Demetrius Lee. Please advise as to the

status of these letters, and when we should expect them.

Thank you,

Rob Hogan

On Sep 18, 2019, at 10:04 AM, Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> wrote:

Mr. Hogan,

I received both documents and these will work just fine. I will get on the admin portion tomorrow. The Right to

Sue documents should hit your mailbox next week. Thanks.

Just as a note, remember that the investigation continues until the request gets to our office. Without that

document and the investigation continuing, you run the risk of the investigator completing the investigation

and recommending “No Cause” which could damage your efforts as the Complainant’s Attorney. Hope this

clarifies any misconceptions. Thanks again.

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

From: Robert Hogan <rob@hoganlaw.com>

Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 9:47 AM

To: Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us>

Subject: Re: Wilson v Midland Police Department TWCCRD #: 1A19543 EEOC #: 31C-2019-00546

Importance: High

CAUTION: Email not from TWC System. Use care when clicking links and opening

attachments.

Dear Mr. Lewis,

Attached is the Request for Right to Sue Letter. Please advise if you need anything further from me.

Thanks,

Rob Hogan

Robert S. Hogan

Attorney

<image001.jpg>

HOGAN LAW FIRM, PC

Licensed in TX, NM & CO

1210 Avenue R | Lubbock, TX 79401

Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2277 (79408)

Tel (806) 771-7900 | Fax (806) 771-7925

Toll Free (877) 771-8472

website | vCard | map | email <image002.jpg><image002.jpg><image002.jpg><image002.jpg><image002.jpg>

<image003.jpg><image003.jpg><image004.jpg>

Life Member

THE MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

THE MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM®

The Top Trial Lawyers In America®

Robert S. Hogan is an attorney licensed in Texas, New Mexico, & Colorado. This communication and any attachments to it are confidential and

intended solely for the use of the person(s) to whom they are addressed. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information that is

legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us by telephone immediately at 806.771.7900, and you are notified that

any disclosure, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. Unless expressly stated to the

contrary, nothing in this email message may be construed as a digital or electronic signature of any employee of the Hogan Law Firm. The

Hogan Law Firm automatically blocks e-mails containing objectionable language or suspicious content. Messages sent to the Hogan Law Firm

should be considered received only if confirmed by a return receipt. Please be advised that an attorney-client relationship cannot be created

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 33 of 35
should be considered received only if confirmed by a return receipt. Please be advised that an attorney-client relationship cannot be created

between any prospective client and the Hogan Law Firm without a signed attorney employment contract.

On Sep 10, 2019, at 7:07 AM, Lewis,Myron <myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us> wrote:

Mr. Hogan, just a reminder. I need the Request for Right to Sue on Lee and Wilson.

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

From: Lewis,Myron

Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 10:28 AM

To: rob@hoganlaw.com

Subject: RE: Lee v Midland Police Department TWCCRD 1A19561 EEOC 31C-2019-00390

Mr. Hogan,

Here are the 180 day letters for Wilson. Mr. Lee already received his via certified mail, but if you

need a copy of it let me know and I will forward you a copy. As soon as I receive your Right to

Sue request I will close out the investigation on this side so you can have control of the case.

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

“Tell Me, I Will Forget”

 “Show Me, I Might Remember”

 “Involve Me, I Will Understand”

From: Lewis,Myron

Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 5:24 PM

To: rob@hoganlaw.com

Subject: Lee v Midland Police Department TWCCRD 1A19561 EEOC 31C-2019-00390

Importance: High

Good Morning Mr. Hogan,

My name is Myron Lewis and I would like to introduce myself to you as the assigned Investigator

for the case with Lee v Midland Police Department. If you need to contact me in reference to this

case my information is provided for your convenience. Please send me an email or give me a call

to verify receipt of this email, I will be contacting you soon to schedule an interview. Thank you for

your time and please reply to this email for all future email contact. My hours of availability

are Mon – Thurs 7:00am to 5:00pm please call if you have questions or need information about

your case.

I have sent your client the 180 day letter that explains the Right to Sue from Civil Rights Division.

If you would like to proceed on your ability to exercise the Right to Sue just send me an email on

your email account with your contact information requesting it and I will process the action

quickly. Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing from you. 

Respectfully,

Myron J. Lewis

Investigator, Texas Workforce Commission - Civil Rights Division

101 E. 15th Street, Guadalupe/CRD

Austin, TX 78778

Email: myron.lewis@twc.state.tx.us

Office: (512) 463-6016 Fax: (512) 482-8465

“Tell Me, I Will Forget”

 “Show Me, I Might Remember”

 “Involve Me, I Will Understand”

Robbie D. 

Wilson.pdf

Demetrius 

Lee.pdf

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 34 of 35
Robbie D. 

Wilson.pdf

Demetrius 

Lee.pdf

Case 7:20-cv-00020 Document 1 Filed 01/26/20 Page 35 of 35