Federal Lawsuit: Former Danbury City Employee Claims Racial Discrimination, Retaliation
Former Danbury city worker Marlene Moore-Callands has filed a federal lawsuit against the municipality, claiming she worked in a hostile environment and that supervisors retaliated against her when she complained.
March 05, 2019 at 01:58 PM
4 minute read
A former longtime worker at Danbury City Hall has filed a federal lawsuit against the municipality, claiming she was retaliated against after complaining of racial discrimination and hostility.
In her lawsuit, filed Monday in U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, 58-year-old Marlene Moore-Callands, who is black, claims her supervisors treated her differently from white colleagues due to her race. She also claims the city knew about the alleged behavior, but did nothing to stop it.
Danbury Corporation Counsel and Chief Legal Officer Robert Yamin declined to comment on the lawsuit. But the city's outside counsel at FordHarrison issued a brief statement Tuesday, saying it could say little on personnel matters.
“The city emphatically denies any wrongdoing and intends to vigorously defend the claims brought by Ms. Moore-Callands,” Johanna Zelman, office managing partner for FordHarrison said.
Moore-Callands worked for the city for 30 years. She started in its tax collection division in 1988, and retired as a customer service representative in the city's permit center in September 2018. She claimed violations of the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Her suit alleges her immediate supervisor, who is now retired and was the manager of the permit division, gave preferential treatment to some employees.
The complaint alleges the manager ”had for many years arranged for caucasian workers doing work comparable to the plaintiff to receive more compensation for their work than the plaintiff.” On one occasion, the suit claims, the manager approved of displays of the Confederate flag. The permit city manager could not be reached Tuesday.
The lawsuit claims that after complaining about “a racially insensitive atmosphere” within the office, Sean Hearty, director of permit coordination and the city's zoning enforcement officer, called Moore-Callands to his office, where he allegedly berated her.
Hearty, the suit says, told Moore-Callands the Confederate flag was “the symbol of the state of Virginia and that the plaintiff is 'from the projects' and 'should be used to these things.”' Hearty also said she was “too sensitive” when she complained about a contractor who told her to “go back to Africa” after the two had words regarding NFL players who did not stand for the national anthem. Hearty declined to comment on the lawsuit Tuesday.
Moore-Callands, the suit says, complained to Danbury's Human Resources Department about both her immediate supervisor and Hearty, but the city took no action.
The lawsuit further states the plaintiff asked permission in early 2018 to work overtime but that Hearty told her no, even though, the lawsuit alleges, white employees were given that benefit. In addition, the lawsuit states, Moore-Callands was not compensated for working during lunch hours while other employees were.
Moore-Callands said she her managers also retaliated against her by denying a request for five weeks of accrued vacation before her 2018 retirement. Her lawsuit says that request “was the standard practice for municipal employees.”
Longtime New Haven solo practitioner John Williams, who represents Moore-Callands, told the Connecticut Law Tribune that high-level city leaders knew about the conflict.
“The mayor had personal knowledge that these things were going on and did nothing,” Williams claimed.
Mayor Mark Boughton declined to comment on the lawsuit Tuesday, except to say that Williams likes “to engage in a lot of hyperbole.”
Williams, meanwhile, said his client is “a strong woman who is deeply troubled by what happened to her.”
“The racially insensitive atmosphere in the office goes back about a decade,” he said. “She finally got fed up with it and started complaining.”
The lawsuit seeks attorney fees and unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.
The case will be heard in front of U.S. District Judge Alfred Covello.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Sinks Goodwin's Request for New Trial After Jury Sides With Boston Police in Wrongful-Death Suit
6 minute readWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
Trending Stories
- 1$34M Verdict Shows How 1 Claim Could Ratchet Up Employment Suit
- 2OIG Progress Puts Connecticut in Leadership Position
- 3Bankruptcy Judge to Step Down in 2025
- 4Justices Seek Solicitor General's Views on Music Industry's Copyright Case Against ISP
- 5Judge to hear arguments on whether Google's advertising tech constitutes a monopoly
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250