Preview
C. A. No. __________
JENNIFER PAVLOVICH
In The
Plaintiff,
District Court
CITY OF ROSENBERG Fort Bend County, Texas
Defendant ______ Judicial District
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff demands a JURY TRIAL in this employment discrimination and retaliatin case
under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (Hereafter, the “ACT”) and state
Common Law as to any and all issues triable to a jury. Plaintiff alleges Defendant CITY OF
ROSENBERG violated the Act when Defendant CITY OF ROSENBERG took adverse
personnel actions against Plaintiff.
COMES NOW, JENNIFER PAVLOVICH, (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”)
complaining of and against CITY OF ROSENBERG(hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”),
and for cause of action respectfully shows the court the following:
PARTIES
Plaintiff is an individual who resided in Fort Bend County at the time the cause of action
accrued.
Defendant City of Rosenberg a local municipality and an employer, employees more than
20 employees and engages in interstate commerce. Defendant can be effectuated by serving
the City of Rosenberg City Secretary, Street, Rosenberg, Texas 77471.
Plaintiff’s Original Petition
VENUE
Venue of this proceeding is proper in rt Bend County, Texas pursuant to Texas Civil
actice & Remedies Code § 15.002 because Fort Be County is the county in which all or
part of the cause of action accrued and the county where Defendant maintains a residence, an
agency or representative.
FACTS
Plaintiff is a female. Plaintiff began working for Defendant ty of Rosenberg May
. Plaintiff’s last position was Director of C ommunication. Plaintiff’s record with
Defendant up to the time of her termination was impeccable with nothing but positive
records on file. Plaintiff’s ratings were above average to superior and Defendant has never
disciplined her
During Plaintiff’s employment the Chief of Police, Dallis Warren, terminated Lt. Hopper.
Plaintiff understood the termination of Lt. Hooper to be related to an IT issue. ortly after
the termination, Cief Warren retired.
The ne ief of Police, Jonathan Wite, along with City Councilmember, Amanda Barta,
requested a review of the termination of Lt. Hooper. There had been an admitted relationship
between Councilmember Barta and Lt. Hooper, who was married
Lt. Hooper was reinstated, with backpay, and assigned to a new position in the animal control
department. aintiff had to work directly with Lt. Hooper in his new position.
Lt. Hooper began texting Ms. Pavlovich, asking if she had boyfriend how long it ha been
since she dated anyone, and asking her to send pictures herself Although Lt. Hooper
implied nted something inappropriate, Plaintiff responded with G rated pictures from
her Facebook account.
Plaintiff’s Original Petition
Plaintiff, feeling very uncomfortable with the exchange between herself and Lt. Hooper, she
hut her phone down entirely for two days to avoid any further contact.
en Plaintif next saw Lt. Hooper at work she began crying and felt verwhelmed
s speaking with Lt. Chad Pino at the time and he wanted to know wha was wrong
Plaintiff fe mbarrassed and feared she would lose her job, but ultimately showed Lt. Pino
the text messages on her phone from Lt. Hooper.
Plaintiff ultimately told Lt. Hooper his texts were making her uncomfortable and asked him
to stop.
. Pino reported a sexual har ssment complaint on behalf of Ms. Pavlovich. Plaintiff
parti pated in the investigation and complied with all requests. Plain did not intend to file
a sexual harassment lawsuit, but just wanted to do her job.
Defendant would not allow Plaintiff to simply do her job. Plaintiff was hand picked to attend
sexual harassment training, was told to keep to herself, and instructed not to go to lunch with
workers.
Ms. Pavlovich pervisor, John Maresh, stated that as a Directo she needed to che ck in and
out whenever she came in or left the building. Mr. Maresh issued a memo stating Plaintiff
was banned from the Police Department.
Councilme ber Barta s daughter called Plaintiff and attempted to get her to admit she
encouraged Lt. Hooper. Plaintiff did not and would not encourage that type of behavior or
communication. Barta s daughter told Plaintiff that Ms. Barta told her Plaintiff was a good
employee, if she could keep her slutty ass at her desk and do her job. Barta s daughter went
on to tell Plain f disgusting and inappropriate details about her home life and how
uncomfortable she and her daughter were in Amanda Barta s home when Lt. Hooper was
upstairs in Ms. Bar s bedroom.
Plaintiff’s Original Petition
Plaintiff met with her supervisor, Mr. Maresh, informing him that she felt harassed, bullied
and retaliated against by his and Defendant s actions. Following this discussion, Defendant
referred Plaintiff to EAP for obvious emotional problems. Plaintiff complied with
everything that was askedof h er.
Defendant s actions cause Plaintiff to suffer extreme stress and anxiety, forcing her to go on
anxiety medication and change her blood pressure medication. Plaintiff even egan suffering
from hives on her face.
Despite Defendant s retaliatory and d criminatory actions against Plaintiff, she cont nued to
show up for work every day, worked 50 plus hours each week, attended events, assisted other
departments, and performed her job well.
Human resources agreed that Plaintiff was treated unfairly following the sexual harassment
complaint, however, the Human Resources Director was fired.
Defendant invited Lt. Hooper to resign.
uncilmember Barta visited Plaintiff in her office. Ms. Barta told Plaintiff she no longe
believed her to be a good person, tha she had ruined Lt. Hooper career, and said Ms
Pavlovich was a disgusting person, who chose terrible friends like Lt. Pino. Ms. Barta told
Plaintiff she had one chance and that was to go before City Council (on live ) and set the
record straight by clearing Lt. Hooper s name. Plaintiff felt threate ed and insulted by Ms.
Barta
Later, John Maresh and Assistant City Manager Joyce Vasut, called Plaintiff into the office.
Plaintiff reported what Councilmember Barta said and did to her. Instead of being pportive
of Plaintiff after this threatening and inappropriate behavior by Ms. Barta, Plaintiff was told
she could e if she wanted because she could not be productive if she was crying.
Plaintiff did not go home. Plaintiff was productive
Plaintiff reported the actions to Huma esources that same
Plaintiff’s Original Petition
Plaintiff did not lie at the council meeting as requested by Councilmember Barta in an effort
to clear Lt. Hooper s name.
Defendant firePlaintiff two days later
Defendant has never disciplined owritten up Plaintiff.
Defendant discriminated and retaliated against Plaintiff in violation of the Texas Commission
of Human Rights Act as amended based on Plaintiff’s gender and for engaging in a protected
activity.
TIMELINESS
Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s lawsuit within two years of the date Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s Charge
of Discrimination.
ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
Plaintiff has completed all administrative conditions precedent since Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s
charge of discrimination within 180 days of the date Plaintiff learned of the adverse
employment action. Plaintiff has allowed 180 days to expire since filing Plaintiff s charge of
discrimination.
Jurisdiction is also appropriate since this action was filed on or before two years from the
date Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s complaint with the Texas Commission on Human Rights.
NO FEDERAL CLAIMS
Plaintiff does not assert any federal claims in this proceeding. Additionally, Plaintiff is in no
way seeking damages or remedies tat may stem from a federal cause of action.
DAMAGES
As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned arbitrary and capricious acts, the
Plaintiff has suffered grievous harm, including, but not limited to, substantial loss of income;
humiliation and mbarrassment among co workers and others; sustained damage to
Plaintiff’s credibility and sustained damage to Plaintiff’s prospects for future employment.
Plaintiff’s Original Petition
ATTORNEY’S FEES
Defendant’s action and conduct as described herein and the resulting damage and loss to
Plaintiff has necessitated Plaintiff retaining the services of ROSENBERG SPROVACH,
ravis, Suite , Houston, Texas 770 in initiating this proceeding. Plaintiff seeks
recovery of reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintif hereby makes Plaintiff’s request for a jury trial in this cause pursuant to Rule 216 of
the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and deposits with the District Clerk of Fort Bend County,
Texas the jury fee of ort 0.00) dollars.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES ONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that Defendant be
cited to appear and answer, and that on final hearing of this cause Plaintiff have the following
relief:
Judgment against Defendant, for actual damages sustained by Plaintiff as
alleged herein;
Judment against Defendant, f or backpay lost by Plaintiff as alleged herein;
Judgment against Defendant, for front pay by Plaintiff as alleged herein;
Grant Plaintiff general damages for the damage to Plaintiff’s reputation;
Pre judgment interest at the high st legal rate;
Post judgment interest at the highest legal rate until paid;
Damages for mental pain and mental anguish;
Exemplary Damages;
Attorney’s fees;
All costs of court expended herein;
Plaintiff’s Original Petition
Such other and further relief, at law or in equity, general or special to which
Plaintiff may show Plaintiff justly entitled.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Ellen Sprovach
Ellen Sprovach
Texas State Bar ID 24000672
ROSENBERGSPROVACH
vis, Suite
Houston, Texas 770
n@rosenberglaw.com
(713) 960
13) 621 670 (Facsimile)
Attorney Charge for Plaintiff
OF COUNSEL:
Gregg M. Rosenberg
ROSENBERGSPROVACH
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
Plaintiff’s Original Petition
Preview
C. A. No. __________ JENNIFER PAVLOVICH In The Plaintiff, District Court CITY OF ROSENBERG Fort Bend County, Texas Defendant ______ Judicial District PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: INTRODUCTION Plaintiff demands a JURY TRIAL in this employment discrimination and retaliatin case under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (Hereafter, the “ACT”) and state Common Law as to any and all issues triable to a jury. Plaintiff alleges Defendant CITY OF ROSENBERG violated the Act when Defendant CITY OF ROSENBERG took adverse personnel actions against Plaintiff. COMES NOW, JENNIFER PAVLOVICH, (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) complaining of and against CITY OF ROSENBERG(hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”), and for cause of action respectfully shows the court the following: PARTIES Plaintiff is an individual who resided in Fort Bend County at the time the cause of action accrued. Defendant City of Rosenberg a local municipality and an employer, employees more than 20 employees and engages in interstate commerce. Defendant can be effectuated by serving the City of Rosenberg City Secretary, Street, Rosenberg, Texas 77471. Plaintiff’s Original Petition VENUE Venue of this proceeding is proper in rt Bend County, Texas pursuant to Texas Civil actice & Remedies Code § 15.002 because Fort Be County is the county in which all or part of the cause of action accrued and the county where Defendant maintains a residence, an agency or representative. FACTS Plaintiff is a female. Plaintiff began working for Defendant ty of Rosenberg May . Plaintiff’s last position was Director of C ommunication. Plaintiff’s record with Defendant up to the time of her termination was impeccable with nothing but positive records on file. Plaintiff’s ratings were above average to superior and Defendant has never disciplined her During Plaintiff’s employment the Chief of Police, Dallis Warren, terminated Lt. Hopper. Plaintiff understood the termination of Lt. Hooper to be related to an IT issue. ortly after the termination, Cief Warren retired. The ne ief of Police, Jonathan Wite, along with City Councilmember, Amanda Barta, requested a review of the termination of Lt. Hooper. There had been an admitted relationship between Councilmember Barta and Lt. Hooper, who was married Lt. Hooper was reinstated, with backpay, and assigned to a new position in the animal control department. aintiff had to work directly with Lt. Hooper in his new position. Lt. Hooper began texting Ms. Pavlovich, asking if she had boyfriend how long it ha been since she dated anyone, and asking her to send pictures herself Although Lt. Hooper implied nted something inappropriate, Plaintiff responded with G rated pictures from her Facebook account. Plaintiff’s Original Petition Plaintiff, feeling very uncomfortable with the exchange between herself and Lt. Hooper, she hut her phone down entirely for two days to avoid any further contact. en Plaintif next saw Lt. Hooper at work she began crying and felt verwhelmed s speaking with Lt. Chad Pino at the time and he wanted to know wha was wrong Plaintiff fe mbarrassed and feared she would lose her job, but ultimately showed Lt. Pino the text messages on her phone from Lt. Hooper. Plaintiff ultimately told Lt. Hooper his texts were making her uncomfortable and asked him to stop. . Pino reported a sexual har ssment complaint on behalf of Ms. Pavlovich. Plaintiff parti pated in the investigation and complied with all requests. Plain did not intend to file a sexual harassment lawsuit, but just wanted to do her job. Defendant would not allow Plaintiff to simply do her job. Plaintiff was hand picked to attend sexual harassment training, was told to keep to herself, and instructed not to go to lunch with workers. Ms. Pavlovich pervisor, John Maresh, stated that as a Directo she needed to che ck in and out whenever she came in or left the building. Mr. Maresh issued a memo stating Plaintiff was banned from the Police Department. Councilme ber Barta s daughter called Plaintiff and attempted to get her to admit she encouraged Lt. Hooper. Plaintiff did not and would not encourage that type of behavior or communication. Barta s daughter told Plaintiff that Ms. Barta told her Plaintiff was a good employee, if she could keep her slutty ass at her desk and do her job. Barta s daughter went on to tell Plain f disgusting and inappropriate details about her home life and how uncomfortable she and her daughter were in Amanda Barta s home when Lt. Hooper was upstairs in Ms. Bar s bedroom. Plaintiff’s Original Petition Plaintiff met with her supervisor, Mr. Maresh, informing him that she felt harassed, bullied and retaliated against by his and Defendant s actions. Following this discussion, Defendant referred Plaintiff to EAP for obvious emotional problems. Plaintiff complied with everything that was askedof h er. Defendant s actions cause Plaintiff to suffer extreme stress and anxiety, forcing her to go on anxiety medication and change her blood pressure medication. Plaintiff even egan suffering from hives on her face. Despite Defendant s retaliatory and d criminatory actions against Plaintiff, she cont nued to show up for work every day, worked 50 plus hours each week, attended events, assisted other departments, and performed her job well. Human resources agreed that Plaintiff was treated unfairly following the sexual harassment complaint, however, the Human Resources Director was fired. Defendant invited Lt. Hooper to resign. uncilmember Barta visited Plaintiff in her office. Ms. Barta told Plaintiff she no longe believed her to be a good person, tha she had ruined Lt. Hooper career, and said Ms Pavlovich was a disgusting person, who chose terrible friends like Lt. Pino. Ms. Barta told Plaintiff she had one chance and that was to go before City Council (on live ) and set the record straight by clearing Lt. Hooper s name. Plaintiff felt threate ed and insulted by Ms. Barta Later, John Maresh and Assistant City Manager Joyce Vasut, called Plaintiff into the office. Plaintiff reported what Councilmember Barta said and did to her. Instead of being pportive of Plaintiff after this threatening and inappropriate behavior by Ms. Barta, Plaintiff was told she could e if she wanted because she could not be productive if she was crying. Plaintiff did not go home. Plaintiff was productive Plaintiff reported the actions to Huma esources that same Plaintiff’s Original Petition Plaintiff did not lie at the council meeting as requested by Councilmember Barta in an effort to clear Lt. Hooper s name. Defendant firePlaintiff two days later Defendant has never disciplined owritten up Plaintiff. Defendant discriminated and retaliated against Plaintiff in violation of the Texas Commission of Human Rights Act as amended based on Plaintiff’s gender and for engaging in a protected activity. TIMELINESS Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s lawsuit within two years of the date Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s Charge of Discrimination. ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT Plaintiff has completed all administrative conditions precedent since Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s charge of discrimination within 180 days of the date Plaintiff learned of the adverse employment action. Plaintiff has allowed 180 days to expire since filing Plaintiff s charge of discrimination. Jurisdiction is also appropriate since this action was filed on or before two years from the date Plaintiff filed Plaintiff’s complaint with the Texas Commission on Human Rights. NO FEDERAL CLAIMS Plaintiff does not assert any federal claims in this proceeding. Additionally, Plaintiff is in no way seeking damages or remedies tat may stem from a federal cause of action. DAMAGES As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned arbitrary and capricious acts, the Plaintiff has suffered grievous harm, including, but not limited to, substantial loss of income; humiliation and mbarrassment among co workers and others; sustained damage to Plaintiff’s credibility and sustained damage to Plaintiff’s prospects for future employment. Plaintiff’s Original Petition ATTORNEY’S FEES Defendant’s action and conduct as described herein and the resulting damage and loss to Plaintiff has necessitated Plaintiff retaining the services of ROSENBERG SPROVACH, ravis, Suite , Houston, Texas 770 in initiating this proceeding. Plaintiff seeks recovery of reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees. JURY DEMAND Plaintif hereby makes Plaintiff’s request for a jury trial in this cause pursuant to Rule 216 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and deposits with the District Clerk of Fort Bend County, Texas the jury fee of ort 0.00) dollars. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES ONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that Defendant be cited to appear and answer, and that on final hearing of this cause Plaintiff have the following relief: Judgment against Defendant, for actual damages sustained by Plaintiff as alleged herein; Judment against Defendant, f or backpay lost by Plaintiff as alleged herein; Judgment against Defendant, for front pay by Plaintiff as alleged herein; Grant Plaintiff general damages for the damage to Plaintiff’s reputation; Pre judgment interest at the high st legal rate; Post judgment interest at the highest legal rate until paid; Damages for mental pain and mental anguish; Exemplary Damages; Attorney’s fees; All costs of court expended herein; Plaintiff’s Original Petition Such other and further relief, at law or in equity, general or special to which Plaintiff may show Plaintiff justly entitled. Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Ellen Sprovach Ellen Sprovach Texas State Bar ID 24000672 ROSENBERGSPROVACH vis, Suite Houston, Texas 770 n@rosenberglaw.com (713) 960 13) 621 670 (Facsimile) Attorney Charge for Plaintiff OF COUNSEL: Gregg M. Rosenberg ROSENBERGSPROVACH ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Plaintiff’s Original Petition