The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Lakeland Eye Clinic alleging unlawful termination of an employee based on sex and gender identity. Specifically, the EEOC alleges that Lakeland Eye Clinic terminated Brandi Branson, a transgender woman, after she informed them she was undergoing a gender transition from male to female. The EEOC is seeking injunctive relief, monetary damages for lost wages and benefits, and punitive damages on behalf of Branson for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Lakeland Eye Clinic alleging unlawful termination of an employee based on sex and gender identity. Specifically, the EEOC alleges that Lakeland Eye Clinic terminated Brandi Branson, a transgender woman, after she informed them she was undergoing a gender transition from male to female. The EEOC is seeking injunctive relief, monetary damages for lost wages and benefits, and punitive damages on behalf of Branson for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Lakeland Eye Clinic alleging unlawful termination of an employee based on sex and gender identity. Specifically, the EEOC alleges that Lakeland Eye Clinic terminated Brandi Branson, a transgender woman, after she informed them she was undergoing a gender transition from male to female. The EEOC is seeking injunctive relief, monetary damages for lost wages and benefits, and punitive damages on behalf of Branson for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Lakeland Eye Clinic alleging unlawful termination of an employee based on sex and gender identity. Specifically, the EEOC alleges that Lakeland Eye Clinic terminated Brandi Branson, a transgender woman, after she informed them she was undergoing a gender transition from male to female. The EEOC is seeking injunctive relief, monetary damages for lost wages and benefits, and punitive damages on behalf of Branson for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
LAKELAND EYE CLINIC, P.A.,
Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : : : :
Case No.:
PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSIONS COMPLAINT This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and to provide appropriate relief to Brandi M. Branson (Branson) who was adversely affected by such practices. As alleged with greater particularly below, Defendant Lakeland Eye Clinic, P.A. (Lakeland or Defendant) terminated Branson, a transgender woman, because of sex.
AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1. J urisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Sections 706(f)(1) and (f)(3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(1) and (f)(3) (Title VII) and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. 1981a. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID 1 -2- 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division. 3. Plaintiff United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or the Commission) is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation, and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Sections 706(f)(1) and (f)(3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(1) and (f)(3). PARTIES 4. At all relevant times, Defendant has been a Florida professional corporation doing business in the State of Florida and has continuously had at least 15 employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e(b), (g) and (h). 6. At all relevant times, Branson was an employee within the meaning of Section 701 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e(f). 7. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Branson filed a charge of discrimination with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 8. The Commission conducted an investigation of Bransons charge, and on or about March 31, 2014, issued a Letter of Determination, finding reasonable cause to believe that Branson was discriminatorily terminated because of sex, in violation of Title VII. Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 2 of 8 PageID 2 -3- 9. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 10. Lakeland Eye Clinic employs seven physicians who perform refractive, corneal, and cataract surgery and treat retinal diseases. It is owned by Dr. Kevin Dorsett, an ophthalmologist. STATEMENT OF FACTS 11. In or about early 2010, Defendant decided to add a hearing division to the eye clinic. Defendant hired Physicians Hearing Services, Inc. (PHSI), a staffing company that specialized in hearing services, to provide candidates for the position of Director of Hearing Services. PHSI recommended Branson for the position based on Bransons extensive experience in the field of hearing aid sales in Florida. 12. On or about J uly 6, 2010, Defendant interviewed and hired Branson as Director of Hearing Services. At the time of hire, Branson presented as male (e.g., used the male name Michael, wore male attire, and otherwise appeared to conform to traditional male gender norms). 13. Branson provided hearing services to patients who were referred to him by Defendants physicians, and these referrals were Bransons only source of patients. 14. Branson performed the duties of his position successfully. 15. In or about late February 2011, Branson began wearing feminine attire to work, including make-up and womens tailored clothing. Branson observed that co-workers snickered, rolled their eyes, and withdrew from social interactions with her in response to her changing appearance. Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 3 of 8 PageID 3 -4- 16. In or about April 2011, Defendant requested a meeting with Branson, wherein Defendant confronted Branson about her changing appearance. Branson then informed Defendant that she was undergoing a gender transition from male to female and that she would be changing her name legally from Michael to Brandi. 17. Following this meeting, Defendants managers and employees made derogatory comments about Bransons appearance, and the ostracism by her co-workers intensified. 18. From about April 2011, until her termination, all but one of Defendants physicians stopped referring patients to Branson for hearing services, thereby depriving her of her client base. 19. On or about J une 10, 2011, Defendant fired Branson, telling her that the position of Director of Hearing Services was being eliminated. Defendant told Branson that it would not hire an employee to replace her, as it was closing its hearing services division. 20. At the time of her termination, Branson was successfully performing the duties of her position. 21. On or about August 2011, Defendant hired a replacement for Branson and continued to operate its hearing services division. Branson was replaced by a male employee who conformed to traditional male gender norms. 22. As a result of the foregoing, Branson suffered damages. 23. Paragraphs 10 through 22 are fully incorporated herein. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 4 of 8 PageID 4 -5- 24. Defendant engaged in unlawful employment practices, in violation of Section 703(a)(1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a)(1), by terminating Branson because of sex. 25. Defendant's decision to terminate Branson was motivated by sex-based considerations. Specifically, Defendant terminated Branson because Branson is transgender, because of Branson's transition from male to female, and/or because Branson did not conform to the Defendant's sex- or gender-based preferences, expectations, or stereotypes. 26. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraphs 10 through 22 above has been to deprive Branson of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee because of her sex. 27. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 10 through 22 above were intentional. 28. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 10 through 22 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Branson. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in any unlawful practice that discriminates against an employee or applicant because of their sex, including on the basis of gender identity; Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 5 of 8 PageID 5 -6- B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs that provide equal employment opportunities regardless of sex (including gender identity), and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices; C. Order Defendant to make Branson whole, providing reinstatement or front pay in lieu of reinstatement, if not feasible; D. Order Defendant to make Branson whole, providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices; E. Order Defendant to make Branson whole by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 10 through 22 above in amounts to be determined at trial; F. Order Defendant to make Branson whole by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 10 through 22 above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial; G. Order Defendant to pay Branson punitive damages for its malicious or recklessly indifferent conduct described in paragraphs 10 through 22 above, in amounts to be determined at trial; H. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest; and I. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 6 of 8 PageID 6 -7- JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
P. DAVID LOPEZ General Counsel
J AMES LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20507
ROBERT WEISBERG Regional Attorney Florida Bar #285676
KIMBERLY A. CRUZ Supervisory Trial Attorney Florida Bar #153729
s/ J an Shelly________________ J AN SHELLY TRIAL COUNSEL Senior Trial Attorney Missouri Bar #42085
SAMANTHA WILLIAMS Trial Attorney Florida Bar #0107117
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 7 of 8 PageID 7 -8- 501 East Polk Street, Suite 1000 Tampa, Florida 33602 Telephone: 813-202-7947 Facsimile: 813-228-2045 Email: J [email protected] [email protected] Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 8 of 8 PageID 8 JS 44 (Rev. 12/12) CIVIL COVER SHEET The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.) I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS (b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY) NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known) II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff (For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant) 1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4 of Business In This State 2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5 Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6 Foreign Country IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only) CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act 120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 400 State Reapportionment 130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 410 Antitrust 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 430 Banks and Banking 150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 450 Commerce & Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 460 Deportation 151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers Product Liability 830 Patent 470 Racketeer Influenced and 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product 480 Consumer Credit (Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY 490 Cable/Sat TV 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY 710 Fair Labor Standards 861 HIA (1395ff) 850 Securities/Commodities/ of Veterans Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud Act 862 Black Lung (923) Exchange 160 Stockholders Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending 720 Labor/Management 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 890 Other Statutory Actions 190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal Relations 864 SSID Title XVI 891 Agricultural Acts 195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 865 RSI (405(g)) 893 Environmental Matters 196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 751 Family and Medical 895 Freedom of Information 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability Leave Act Act Medical Malpractice 790 Other Labor Litigation 896 Arbitration REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 791 Employee Retirement FEDERAL TAX SUITS 899 Administrative Procedure 210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff Act/Review or Appeal of 220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) Agency Decision 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 871 IRSThird Party 950 Constitutionality of 240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 State Statutes 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration Other 550 Civil Rights Actions 448 Education 555 Prison Condition 560 Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only) 1 Original Proceeding 2 Removed from State Court 3 Remanded from Appellate Court 4 Reinstated or Reopened 5 Transferred from Another District (specify) 6 Multidistrict Litigation VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
Brief description of cause: VII. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint: JURY DEMAND: Yes No VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY (See instructions): JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD FOR OFFICE USE ONLY RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1-1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID 9 U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Jan Shelly, Esq.; U.S. EEOC, Tampa Field Office, 501 E. Polk Street, Tampa, FL 33602, (813)202-7947 Lakeland Eye Clinic Polk Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended Unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex 09/25/2014 s/ Jan Shelly Print Save As... Reset JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 12/12) INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44 Authority For Civil Cover Sheet The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows: I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, giving both name and title. (b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.) (c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting in this section "(see attachment)". II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X" in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below. United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here. United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box. Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked. Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.) III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this section for each principal party. IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, is sufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerk(s) in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than one nature of suit, select the most definitive. V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the six boxes. Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts. Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petition for removal is granted, check this box. Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing date. Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date. Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrict litigation transfers. Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. When this box is checked, do not check (5) above. VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P. Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction. Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded. VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases. Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet. Case 8:14-cv-02421-MSS-AEP Document 1-1 Filed 09/25/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID 10
Michael A. Weston Deborah Weston, H/W v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania D/B/A Department of Corrections State Correctional Institution at Graterford Dolores Merithew, 251 F.3d 420, 3rd Cir. (2001)