IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

GARY VARNER

544 Chestnut Street

Nelsonville, OH 45769

Plaintiff,

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 

JUDGE: 

v.

APG MEDIA OF OHIO, LLC

d/b/a The Athens Messenger 

9300 Johnson Road

Athens, OH 45701

Serve also:

c/o CT Corporation System, 

Statutory Agent

4400 Easton Commons Way

Columbus, OH 43219

Defendant.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 

AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

JURY DEMAND ENDORSED 

HEREIN

Plaintiff Gary Varner, by and through undersigned counsel, as his Complaint against the 

Defendant, states and avers the following:

PARTIES 

1. Varner is a resident of the city of Nelsonville, Athens County, state of Ohio. 

2. Defendant APG Media of Ohio, LLC d/b/a The Athens Messenger (“APG”), is a foreign 

limited liability company conducting business throughout the state of Ohio, with its 

principal place of business located at 9300 Johnson Road, Athens, OH 45701.

3. At all times referenced herein, APG was Varner’s employer within the meaning of Title 

VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., and/or Ohio 

R.C. §4112.01(A)(2). 

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 1 of 13 PAGEID #: 1
.2

JURISDICTION & VENUE

4. This court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 in that Varner is 

alleging a Federal Law Claim under Title VII. 

5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Varner’s state law claims pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1367, as Varner’s state law claims are so closely related to his federal law claims 

that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States 

Constitution.

6. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

7. Within 180 days of the conduct alleged below, Varner dual filed a Charge of 

Discrimination with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission and the Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”, Charge No. 532-2018-00120) against APG (“EEOC 

Charge”).

8. On or about May 11, 2018, the EEOC issued and mailed a Notice of Right to Sue to Varner

regarding the EEOC Charge.

9. Varner received his Notice of Right to Sue letter from the EEOC in accordance with 42 

U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1), which has been attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit 1.

10. Varner has filed this Complaint on or before the 90-day deadline set forth in his Notice of 

Right to Sue. 

11. Varner has properly exhausted his administrative remedies pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 

1614.407(b).

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 2 of 13 PAGEID #: 2
.3

FACTS

12. Varner is a former employee of APG.

13. Varner worked for APG as a Carrier, pursuant to the terms of an Independent Contractor 

Newspaper Delivery Agreement (“Agreement”), from 2001, until APG unlawfully 

terminated Varner’s Agreement and employment on June 13, 2017. 

14. Varner’s most recent Agreement was for a 12-month period from August 4, 2016 to August 

4, 2017. The Agreement is attached as Plaintiff’s Exhibit 2. 

15. Varner had an exemplary employment record with no history of discipline in the 16 years 

he worked for APG. Indeed, Varner regularly received positive reviews and feedback from 

his supervisors and customers through the years, never missed his route, and consistently 

delivered his newspapers on-time. 

16. Despite Varner’s previously positive employment record, Varner’s supervisors and coworkers constantly harassed Varner due to his sexuality (homosexual), and APG started 

conveniently finding and/or creating a basis to terminate Varner after he reported this 

harassment to the company.

17. Upon information and belief, Varner is the only homosexual male Carrier employed by 

APG. 

18. For years, Varner has endured harassment, disparate treatment, and a hostile work 

environment due to his sexuality. 

19. The harassment has come not only from Varner’s co-workers (e.g., Mandy Wendell, 

Amber Partlow, Roger Partlow), but also from his supervisors, including Craig Dickelman 

(Circulation Manager) and Penny Lendway (District Manager). 

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 3 of 13 PAGEID #: 3
.4

20. Throughout the years, Varner repeatedly reported the harassment outlined above to his 

supervisors and to Human Resources. Not only did APG do nothing about the 

discrimination and harassment, but some of Varner’s own supervisors perpetuated the 

harassment.

21. This harassment has included such conduct as slurs to Varner’s face, calling him “faggot” 

and other derogatory names, to a general refusal by any co-workers or supervisors to help 

Varner with his route if he was sick or injured. In fact, Lendway would often cover routes 

for other APG employees, such as Wendell or Partlow, but refused to ever cover for Varner

if he needed help.

22. The harassment and hostility towards Varner came to a head on the evening of June 9, 

2017, when Wendell, Partlow, and Wendell’s sister Mindy (LNU), began attacking and 

screaming at Varner and his daughter at APG’s loading docks. 

23. At one point, while Varner was trying to move his car so he could leave, Mindy screamed

to Varner, “your faggot ass can walk the newspapers there”. During the altercation, Varner

defended himself and his daughter, but got away as quickly as he could. 

24. The next morning, June 10, 2017, Dickelman and Lendway met with Varner and 

terminated his Agreement and employment, without explanation or cause. 

25. None of the heterosexual employees involved in the previous night’s altercation were 

disciplined in any way, even though they were the aggressors.

26. After years of abuse and harassment, Varner defended himself against verbal and physical 

attacks from co-workers, and instead of disciplining those involved in attacking Varner

based on his sexuality, APG used it as its opportunity to terminate Varner’s Agreement and 

employment with APG.

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 4 of 13 PAGEID #: 4
.5

27. Following Varner’s termination, Dickelman sent Varner a letter dated June 13, 2017, in 

which Dickelman stated, “Pursuant to your signed agreement...we are exercising our 

termination rights. Effective in 30 days, July 12, 2017, your independent contractor 

newspaper delivery agreement is terminated.” 

28. As with the June 10 meeting, Dickelman provided no explanation or cause for Varner’s

termination. Then, shortly after receiving this letter, Dickelman called Varner and 

informed him that Varner would not be working for the next 30 days, but instead, his 

termination was effective immediately.

29. Paragraph 15 of the Agreement reads, in relevant part,

A. Either party may terminate this contract for any reason and without cause by 

providing thirty (30) days written notice to the opposite party.

B. Either party may terminate this contract for cause immediately. “Cause” shall 

include, but not be limited to, material breach of this contract.

30. Here, APG provided no “cause” for Varner’s termination. Thus, per the Agreement, 

Varner was entitled to 30 days’ written notice prior to termination; although Dickelman 

sent Varner a letter on June 13, 2017 purporting to give Varner 30 days’ notice, Dickelman 

called Varner shortly thereafter and advised that Varner’s termination was effective 

immediately. 

31. Thus, not only did APG discriminate against Varner as described above, but also it 

terminated his employment in violation of the Agreement.

32. The termination of Varner’s Agreement and employment with APG was an adverse 

employment action by APG. 

33. Varner was discriminated against for being homosexual. 

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 5 of 13 PAGEID #: 5
.6

34. Varner’s Agreement and employment with APG was actually terminated due to his sexual 

orientation, and/or in retaliation for making complaints of discrimination and harassment 

in the workplace. 

35. There was a causal connection between Varner’s protected classes (sex/gender) and 

complaints and APG’s adverse actions taken against Varner. 

36. APG did not proffer any legitimate non-discriminatory reason for terminating Varner’s

Agreement and employment with APG.

37. APG’s purported reason for terminating Varner’s Agreement and employment with APG

was pretext for sex/gender discrimination, and/or retaliation for making complaints of 

discrimination and harassment in the workplace.

38. As a result of being treated disparately on the basis of his sex/gender, and being terminated

from APG, Varner has suffered severe emotional distress, anxiety, and depression. He has 

had and continues to accrue damages based thereupon. 

COUNT I: GENDER/SEX DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF TITLE VII

39. Varner restates each and every prior paragraph of this Complaint, as if it were fully 

restated herein. 

40. Varner is a member of a statutorily protected class based on his sex/gender and sexual 

orientation under Title VII.

41. During his employment with APG, Varner was able to successfully perform the essential 

functions of his job. 

42. APG treated Varner differently than other similarly situated employees based on his

sex/gender and sexual orientation. 

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 6 of 13 PAGEID #: 6
.7

43. APG discriminated against Varner on the basis of his sex/gender and sexual orientation by, 

among other ways, terminating his Agreement and employment with APG.

44. APG’s discrimination against Varner based on his sex/gender and sexual orientation 

violates Title VII.

45. APG violated Title VII when they terminated Varner’s Agreement and employment with 

APG based on his sex/gender and sexual orientation.

46. Upon information and belief, following the termination of Varner’s Agreement and 

employment with APG, Defendant replaced him with someone outside his protected class. 

47. As a direct and proximate result of APG’s conduct, Varner suffered and will continue to 

suffer damages, including economic, emotional distress and physical sickness damages.

COUNT II: GENDER/SEX DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF OHIO 

REVISED CODE § 4112.02(A), ET SEQ.

48. Varner restates each and every prior paragraph of this Complaint, as if it were fully 

restated herein. 

49. Varner is a member of a statutorily protected class based on her sex/gender and sexual 

orientation under R.C. § 4112.02.

50. During his employment with APG, Varner was able to successfully perform the essential 

functions of his job. 

51. APG treated Varner differently than other similarly situated employees based on his

sex/gender and sexual orientation. 

52. APG discriminated against Varner on the basis of his sex/gender and sexual orientation by, 

among other ways, terminating his Agreement and employment with APG.

53. APG’s discrimination against Varner based on his sex/gender and sexual orientation

violates R.C. § 4112.02.

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 7 of 13 PAGEID #: 7
.8

54. APG violated R.C. § 4112.02 when they terminated Varner’s Agreement and employment 

with APG based on his sex/gender and sexual orientation.

55. Upon information and belief, following the termination of Varner’s Agreement and 

employment with APG, APG replaced him with someone outside his protected class. 

56. As a direct and proximate result of APG’s conduct, Varner suffered and will continue to 

suffer damages, including economic, emotional distress and physical sickness damages.

COUNT III: HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT ON THE BASIS OF GENDER/SEX

DISCRIMINATION

57. Varner restates each and every prior paragraph of this Complaint, as if it were fully restated 

herein.

58. During his employment with APG, Varner was subjected to offensive and harassing 

conduct by his coworkers, supervisors, and managers based on his sex/gender and sexual 

orientation. 

59. APG knew or should have known of the harassing conduct against Varner.

60. APG condoned, tolerated and ratified this harassing conduct.

61. This harassing conduct was severe and/or pervasive.

62. This harassing conduct was offensive to Varner.

63. This harassing conduct interfered with Varner’s ability to perform his job duties.

64. APG’s offensive and harassing conduct created a hostile and/or abusive work environment 

for Varner.

65. APG’s offensive and harassing conduct created a hostile and/or abusive work environment 

for the reasonable person similarly-situated to Varner.

66. As a direct and proximate result of APG’s conduct, Varner suffered and will continue to 

suffer damages. 

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 8 of 13 PAGEID #: 8
.9

COUNT IV: RETALIATION

67. Varner restates each and every prior paragraph of this complaint, as if it were fully restated 

herein. 

68. As a result of APG’s conduct described above, Varner complained to his supervisors, 

managers, and Human Resources about the discrimination, harassment, and disparate 

treatment he was experiencing.

69. Subsequent to Varner’s reporting of discrimination, harassment, and disparate treatment,

APG terminated Varner’s Agreement and employment with APG. 

70. APG’s actions were retaliatory in nature based on Varner’s opposition to the unlawful 

discriminatory and disparate treatment. 

71. Pursuant to R.C. §4112.02(I), it is an unlawful discriminatory practice “to discriminate in 

any manner against any other person because that person has opposed any unlawful 

discriminatory practice defined in this section...”

72. As a direct and proximate result of APG’s retaliatory discrimination against and 

termination of Varner’s Agreement and employment with APG, he suffered and will 

continue to suffer damages, including economic, emotional distress and physical sickness 

damages. 

COUNT V: BREACH OF CONTRACT

73. Varner restates each and every prior paragraph of this complaint, as if it were fully restated 

herein. 

74. At the time of his termination from APG, Varner’s most recent Agreement was for a 12-

month period from August 4, 2016 to August 4, 2017.

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 9 of 13 PAGEID #: 9
.10

75. Varner successfully complied with the terms of the Agreement, performed all the 

conditions precedent and promises required by them therein, and was entitled to 

performance and/or payment on APG’s part. 

76. APG breached the Agreement by, among other things, terminating the Agreement without 

providing Varner 30 days’ prior written notice; although Dickelman sent Varner a letter on 

June 13, 2017 purporting to give Varner 30 days’ notice, Dickelman called Varner shortly 

thereafter and advised that Varner’s termination was effective immediately.

77. As a direct and proximate result of said material breaches of the Agreement, Varner has

been damaged and APG is liable to Varner in an amount to be determined at trial, but in 

excess of $25,000, as well as interest at the rate provided by law, the cost of the within 

action and reasonable legal fees as prescribed by Ohio Revised Code §5321.05. 

COUNT VI: INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

78. Varner restates each and every prior paragraph of this Complaint, as if it were fully restated 

herein. 

79. As set forth above, APG targeted, harassed, bullied, embarrassed, and ultimately 

discharged Varner based on his sexual orientation, and/or in retaliation for complaining of 

the discrimination and harassment in the workplace. Indeed, APG targeted the only 

homosexual male carrier at APG, called him derogatory and offensive names, physically 

bullied him, and then terminated his Agreement and employment without cause or warning 

when he complained of the treatment.

80. APG intended to cause Varner emotional distress, or knew that their acts or omissions 

would result in serious emotional distress to Varner.

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 10 of 13 PAGEID #: 10
.11

81. APG’s conduct was so extreme and outrageous as to go beyond all possible bounds of 

decency and was such that it can be considered as utterly intolerable in a civilized 

community. 

82. As a direct and proximate result of APG’s acts and omissions as set forth above, Varner

has suffered mental anguish of such a serious nature that no reasonable person could be 

expected to endure it. 

83. As a direct and proximate result of APG’s conduct and the resulting emotional distress, 

Varner has suffered and will continue to suffer damages, including economic, emotional 

distress and physical sickness damages.

DEMAND FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Varner demands from APG the following:

a) Issue a permanent injunction:

i. Requiring APG to abolish discrimination, harassment, and retaliation;

ii. Requiring allocation of significant funding and trained staff to implement all 

changes within two years;

iii. Requiring removal or demotion of all supervisors who have engaged in 

discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, and failed to meet their legal 

responsibility to promptly investigate complaints and/or take effective action to 

stop and deter prohibited personnel practices against employees; 

iv. Creating a process for the prompt investigation of discrimination, harassment, 

or retaliation complaints; and

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 11 of 13 PAGEID #: 11
.12

v. Requiring mandatory and effective training for all employees and supervisors 

on discrimination, harassment, and retaliation issues, investigations, and 

appropriate corrective actions; 

b) An award against APG for compensatory and monetary damages to compensate Varner

for physical injury, physical sickness, lost wages, emotional distress, and other 

consequential damages, in an amount in excess of $25,000 per claim to be proven at 

trial;

c) An award of punitive damages against APG in an amount in excess of $25,000;

d) An award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and non-taxable costs for Varner’s claims as 

allowable under law;

e) An award of the taxable costs of this action; and

f) An award of such other relief as this Court may deem necessary and proper. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Matthew G. Bruce_______

Matthew Bruce (0083769)

THE SPITZ LAW FIRM, LLC

25200 Chagrin Blvd., Suite 200

Beachwood, OH 44122

Phone: (513) 883-1147

Fax: (216) 291-5744

Email: matthew.bruce@spitzlawfirm.com

Attorney for Plaintiff Gary Varner

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 12 of 13 PAGEID #: 12
JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Gary Varner demands a trial by jury by the maximum number of jurors 

permitted.

/s/Matthew G. Bruce_____

Matthew Bruce (0083769)

Case: 2:18-cv-00706-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/19/18 Page: 13 of 13 PAGEID #: 13