Dollar v Trustees of Mount de Sales, GAMD 15-cv-253 (29 Jun 2015) Doc 1,COMPLAINT

8/20/2019 Dollar v Trustees of Mount de Sales, GAMD 15-cv-253 (29 Jun 2015) Doc 1,COMPLAINT

1/191

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THEMIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

MACON DIVISION

FLINT DOLLAR,

Plaintiff,

vs.

TRUSTEES OF MOUNT DE SALES ACADEMY, INC. d/b/a MOUNT DE SALES ACADEMY,

Defendant

Case No.: ___________________

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT

NOW COMES PLAINTIFF, FLINT DOLLAR, by and through undersigned

counsel, and files this Complaint for Damages, showing the Court the following:

1.

This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §

2000e, et seq., (as amended) to redress Defendant’s discrimination against Plaintiff on

the basis of sex (gender stereotyping).

2.

This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(1) and (3)

and 28 U.S.C. §1331 and 1337. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§1391(b), because Defendant’s unlawful employment practices as alleged in this

Complaint were committed in this judicial District and Defendant resides in this District.

3.

Plaintiff (hereinafter Mr. Dollar) is a male citizen of the United States of America

and a resident of Buffalo, New York. Mr. Dollar is authorized to bring this action by 42

5:15-CV-253 (LJA)

Case 5:15-cv-00253-LJA Document 1 Filed 06/29/15 Page 1 of 11


2/19

2

U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1).

4.

Defendant Trustees of Mount de Sales Academy, Inc., d/b/a Mount de Sales

Academy, is a corporation organized pursuant to the Georgia Nonprofit Corporation

Code. Defendant at all relevant times to this Complaint has maintained its registered

and principal office in Bibb County, Georgia, and has been a corporation doing business

in Bibb County, Georgia and the Middle District of Georgia. Defendant is subject to the

jurisdiction of this Court. Defendant can be served through its President, David Francis

Held, 851 Orange Street, Macon, Georgia 31201.

5.

Defendant is now and at all times relevant hereto has been an employer

engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of §701(b), (g) and (h) of

Title VII and has employed more than the requisite number of persons for the requisite

duration under Title VII.

6.

Defendant is a Catholic, independent, college preparatory school sponsored by

the Sisters of Mercy. Defendant is owned and operated by an independent Board of

Trustees.

7.

According to its Mission Statement, Defendant is “dedicated to the spiritual and

intellectual growth of each student, [and it] is committed to educating young men and

women of all cultural, economic, and religious backgrounds.

8.



3/19

3

According to its faculty handbook in effect for the 2013 – 2014 school year

(hereinafter “faculty handbook”), Defendant purports to hold the following beliefs:

- Every person is called to holiness and to develop a relationship with a

personal and loving God.

- Every person is valued as a unique individual with physical, social, emotional

and intellectual gifts and needs.

- Every person is called to respect the value of life and the dignity of each

individual.

- Every person must be aware of and responsive to his/her current and long

range obligations to the global community.

- Every person can learn and achieve his/her full potential when provided with

a variety of appropriate learning strategies.

- Every person’s self-esteem is enhanced by positive relationships and mutual

respect. Every person in the school community shares the responsibility for

advancing the school’s mission.

9.

Defendant’s faculty handbook sets forth the following profile of a member of the

faculty: “Each member of the faculty of Mount de Sales Academy is expected to strive

to meet the Professional Excellence Standards . . . in order to meet the mission of the

Academy, achieve a high level of competency in discipline and teaching practices, and

model the highest standards in relating to the community.”

10.

Throughout his employment with Defendant, Mr. Dollar did comply with



4/19

4

Defendant’s Professional Excellence Standards.

11.

Defendant’s faculty handbook does not require teachers to be members of the

Catholic Church, and it does not require any faculty members to adhere to the Catholic

Church’s teachings on marriage.

12.

In its faculty handbook Defendant represents it “is an equal employment

opportunity employer and strives to comply with all applicable laws prohibiting

discrimination based on race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin

or ancestry, physical or mental disability, veteran status, marital status, HIV-positive

status, as well as any other category protected by federal, state or local laws. All such

discrimination is unlawful and all persons involved in the operations of Mount de Sales

are prohibited from engaging in this type of conduct.”

13.

Defendant’s faculty handbook does set forth certain “recognized causes for

corrective action.” Failure by a faculty member to comply with the Catholic Church’s

teachings on marriage is not set forth in the faculty handbook as a recognized cause for

corrective action.

14.

Defendant’s faculty handbook does set forth a Code of Ethics for its employees.

That Code of Ethics does not require Defendant’s employees to adhere to the Catholic

Church’s teachings on marriage, however.



5/19

5

15.

During November of 2010, one of Defendant’s administrators approached Mr.

Dollar about teaching band for Defendant. Mr. Dollar initially declined the invitation to

apply for the position.

16.

In January of 2011, the same administrator again approached Mr. Dollar about

teaching for Defendant. Subsequent to this request, Mr. Dollar met with the President

of Defendant, Mr. David Held, in January of 2011, to discuss teaching seventh and

eighth grade chorus on a part-time basis for the remainder of the 2010 – 2011 school

year.

17.

At the meeting with Mr. Held in January of 2011, Mr. Dollar informed Mr. Held he

was gay and that he was living with his same-sex partner.

18.

On January 12, 2011, in response to Defendant’s solicitations, Mr. Dollar

submitted an application for employment. A copy of Mr. Dollar’s application is attached

as Exhibit A.

19.

Nothing in Defendant’s application states employees must be Catholic or adhere

to Catholic teachings.

20.

In April of 2011, Defendant offered and Mr. Dollar accepted a full-time position to

teach Instrumental Music (6th – 12th grade), Choral Music (6th – 8th grade), General



6/19

6

Music (6th – 7th grade), and piano (8th grade).

21.

Defendant continuously employed Mr. Dollar until May 21, 2014.

22.

Throughout his employment with Defendant, Mr. Dollar’s responsibilities were

limited to teaching band, chorus and instrumental music. Mr. Dollar was not a minister,

was not required to have any particular religious training for his position, and he was not

responsible for any religious instruction.

23.

Mr. Dollar’s job duties were wholly unrelated to any religious instruction.

24.

In October of 2013, Mr. Dollar and his partner decided to marry, and they began

planning for their wedding in July of 2014.

25.

Mr. Dollar told certain faculty members about his wedding plans, as well as Mr.

Held.

26.

In January of 2014, a fellow faculty member informed Mr. Dollar she wanted to

host wedding shower for him and his partner. In March of 2014 the faculty member sent

invitations to the wedding shower to specific faculty members, including Mr. Held.

27.

On May 1, 2014, Defendant offered, and Mr. Dollar accepted employment with

Defendant for the 2014 – 2015 school year. A copy of that contract is attached as



7/19

7

Exhibit B.

28.

On May 21, 2014, Mr. Held summoned Mr. Dollar to his office and informed Mr.

Dollar that he could no longer retain him on the MDS faculty because of his impending

marriage to his homosexual partner. Defendant terminated Mr. Dollar on that date.

29.

Prior to Mr. Dollar’s May 21, 2014 meeting with Mr. Held, Defendant had never

communicated to Mr. Dollar that an employee could be terminated for not adhering to

the Catholic Church’s teachings on marriage, and Mr. Dollar had never been informed

Defendant had an official position on marriage.

30.

Defendant has accepted beliefs and behavior by heterosexual employees who

violate or do not adhere to the Catholic Church’s teachings, including the Catholic

Church’s teachings on marriage. Defendant accepted and employed one or more

heterosexual faculty members who cohabitated while not married. Defendant accepted

and employed one or more heterosexual divorced faculty members. Defendant

accepted and employed one or more heterosexual faculty members who had divorced

and remarried. Defendant accepted and employed non-Christian faculty members,

including Jewish, Buddhist, and atheist/agnostic faculty members.

31.

Prior to his termination on May 21, 2014, Mr. Dollar had satisfactorily performed

his job duties with Defendant.

32.



8/19

8

Even after his termination, Mr. Held continued to praise Mr. Dollar for his

outstanding work at Mount de Sales. Mr. Held made clear Defendant was terminating

Mr. Dollar solely because of his impending same-sex marriage.

33.

Subsequent to Defendant’s termination of Mr. Dollar’s employment, Mr. Held sent

a letter to parents of students in which he addressed Defendant’s personnel decisions.

In that letter, among other things, Mr. Held stated: “We are an Independent Catholic

School sponsored by the Sisters of Mercy. As a Mercy School, we operate from a set of

core values that is in keeping with the charism of The Sisters of Mercy.”

34.

President Held did not consult with the Sisters of Mercy regarding Mr. Dollar’s

employment prior to his decision to terminate Mr. Dollar’s employment.

35.

Mr. Dollar timely filed a charge of discrimination against Defendant with the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on June 20, 2014, alleging discrimination

on the basis of sex (sexual stereotyping). A copy of Mr. Dollar’s charge of discrimination

is attached as Exhibit C.

36.

On January 30, 2015, The EEOC issued a Determination letter in connection with

Mr. Dollar’s charge of discrimination, which stated in part as follows:

“Based upon the evidence and the record as a whole, there is reasonable

cause to conclude that the Charging Party was discriminated against because of

his sex (sex stereotyping) in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,



9/19

9

as amended.”

A copy of the EEOC’s Determination letter is attached as Exhibit D.

37.

The EEOC issued a “Notice of Right to Sue” on April 2, 2015, entitling Mr. Dollar

to commence an action within ninety (90) days of receipt of that notice. A copy is

attached as Exhibit E.

38.

Mr. Dollar has fulfilled all conditions precedent to this suit.

COUNT ISex Discrimination(Sexual Stereotyping)

39.

Mr. Dollar re-alleges and incorporates by reference herein the allegations

contained in paragraphs 1 through 38 above.

40.

Mr. Dollar’s planned marriage to his same sex partner did not comport with

Defendant’s traditional gender or sex stereotypes that men marry women.

41.

Defendant terminated Mr. Dollar because his plans to engage in a marriage that

did not comply with traditional gender or sex stereotypes.

42.

Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S.

228 (1989), the law has been clear that Title VII prohibits employers from acting upon



10/19

10

stereotypes about sexual roles in making employment decisions.

43.

Defendant violated Title VII when it terminated Mr. Dollar’s employment because

Mr. Dollar’s planned wedding to his same sex partner did not comport with Defendant’s

traditional gender stereotypes.

44.

Mr. Dollar is entitled to back wages, as well as compensation for non-pecuniary

loss resulting from Defendant’s unlawful conduct, including emotional pain and

suffering, anxiety, stress, depression, and humiliation, in an amount to be determined by

the jury.

45.

Defendant acted with malice or reckless indifference to Mr. Dollar’s federally

protected rights such that he is entitled to punitive damages.

WHEREFORE, as to Count I, Mr. Dollar prays this Court grant him the following

relief:

(a) Award Plaintiff appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in an

amount to be determined at trial;

(b) Award Plaintiff front pay and/or reinstatement, and any other affirmative

relief necessary to eradicate the effects of Defendant’s unlawful

employment practices;

(c) Award Plaintiff compensation for past and future pecuniary loss resulting

from Defendant’s unlawful conduct;

(d) Award Plaintiff compensation for non-pecuniary loss resulting from



11/19

11

Defendant’s unlawful conduct, including emotional pain and suffering,

anxiety, stress, depression, and humiliation, in an amount to be

determined by the jury at trial;

(e) Award Plaintiff punitive damages for Defendant’s malicious and reckless

conduct, in an amount to be determined by the jury at trial;

(f) Award Plaintiff his attorney’s fees and costs; and

(g) Award Plaintiff such other and further legal and equitable relief as the

Court may deem appropriate.

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS TRIAL BY JURY OF ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE.

This June 29, 2015.

/s Charles E. Cox, Jr. Ga. Bar No. 192305Attorney for PlaintiffPost Office Box 67Macon, Georgia 31202-0067Telephone: (478) 757-2990Facsimile: (478) 757-2991E-mail: [email protected]



12/19

CaseDollar v. Trust

Mount de SAcademy,

Exhib

A

Case 5:15-cv-00253-LJA Document 1-1 Filed 06/29/15 Page 1 of 1


13/19

CaseDollar v. Trustees of

Mount de SalesAcademy, Inc.

Exhibit

B



14/19



15/19

CaseDollar v. Trustees


Exhibit

C



16/19

CaseDollar v. Trustees


Exhibit

D



17/19



18/19

CaseDollar v. Trustees of


Exhibit

E



19/19


Documents

Dollar v Trustees of Mount de Sales, GAMD 15-cv-253 (29 Jun 2015) Doc 1,COMPLAINT