NO.

ANGELA FIGURA, Plaintiff,

VS.

CITY OF ROWLETT, Defendant.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Angela Figura ("Figura" or "Plaintiff') files her Original Petition complaining of

Defendant City of Rowlett and for causes of action would respectfully show the court and jury:

I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN

1. Discovery in this case should be conducted under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure

190.3 as a Level II case.

II. PARTIES

2. Angela Figura is an individual residing in the City of Rowlett. She formerly

worked for the City of Rowlett in Dallas County where her causes of action accrued.

3. The City of Rowlett ("Rowlett") is a Texas municipality located primarily in

Dallas County, Texas. Rowlett can be served with Citation by serving its Mayor, Todd W.

Gotel, or its Secretary, Laura Hallmark at 4000 Main St. Rowlett, Tx 75088 or wherever they

may be found.

1 1

NO. ____________

ANGELA FIGURA, IN THE DISTRICT COURT

Plaintiff,

VS.

DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

CITY OF ROWLETT,

Defendant. _______ JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION AND JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Angela Figura (Figura or Plaintiff) files her Original Petition complaining of

Defendant City of Rowlett and for causes of action would respectfully show the court and jury:

I.

DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN

1. Discovery in this case should be conducted under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure

190.3 as a Level II case.

II.

PARTIES

2. Angela Figura is an individual residing in the City of Rowlett. She formerly

worked for the City of Rowlett in Dallas County where her causes of action accrued.

3. The City of Rowlett (Rowlett) is a Texas municipality located primarily in

Dallas County, Texas. Rowlett can be served with Citation by serving its Mayor, Todd W.

Gotel, or its Secretary, Laura Hallmark at 4000 Main St. Rowlett, Tx 75088 or wherever they

may be found.

Teresa Jones

DC-14-06786

FILEDDALLAS COUNTY

6/26/2014 12:10:15 PMGARY FITZSIMMONS

DISTRICT CLERK

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. Jurisdiction is proper in this court since Plaintiffs damages exceed its minimum

jurisdictional amounts.

5. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas, because Plaintiff worked primarily in

Dallas County when her causes of action accrued.

IV. FACTS

6. Plaintiff Angela Figura started working for the City of Rowlett as a police officer

trainee in September 2012.

7. As part of her police academy training paperwork, Figura completed a medical

questionnaire form on September 20, 2012. The form included information about Figura' s

allergies. One of the allergies she listed was an allergy to cayenne pepper.

8. Due to her allergy, Figura refused to participate in training involving being

sprayed with mace, whose ingredients include cayenne pepper

9. On April 3 and April 9, 2013, Chief of Police W M Brodnax ("Brodnax") sought

information from Figura regarding her sensitivity to cayenne pepper.

10. Figura provided medical documentation indicating that she could perform the

"essential functions" of her job and that being exposed to cayenne pepper was not likely to be

"life threatening" to her though it could cause "respiratory complications" at times.

11. Once Figura proved that she was able to perform the job, Brodnax began to allege

that she was being dishonest with the department about her disability.

12. Figura was terminated from her job due to her sensitivity to cayenne pepper or

based on her gender.

2 2

III.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. Jurisdiction is proper in this court since Plaintiffs damages exceed its minimum

jurisdictional amounts.

5. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas, because Plaintiff worked primarily in

Dallas County when her causes of action accrued.

IV.

FACTS

6. Plaintiff Angela Figura started working for the City of Rowlett as a police officer

trainee in September 2012.

7. As part of her police academy training paperwork, Figura completed a medical

questionnaire form on September 20, 2012. The form included information about Figuras

allergies. One of the allergies she listed was an allergy to cayenne pepper.

8. Due to her allergy, Figura refused to participate in training involving being

sprayed with mace, whose ingredients include cayenne pepper

9. On April 3 and April 9, 2013, Chief of Police W M Brodnax (Brodnax) sought

information from Figura regarding her sensitivity to cayenne pepper.

10. Figura provided medical documentation indicating that she could perform the

essential functions of her job and that being exposed to cayenne pepper was not likely to be

life threatening to her though it could cause respiratory complications at times.

11. Once Figura proved that she was able to perform the job, Brodnax began to allege

that she was being dishonest with the department about her disability.

12. Figura was terminated from her job due to her sensitivity to cayenne pepper or

based on her gender.

13. Meanwhile, a Rowlett Police Department officer Bennie Holmes was allowed to

continue working for the Department, despite his intolerance for pepper spray due to LASIK

surgery.

V. ADMINISTRATIVE PREREQUISITES SATISFIED

14. On November 14, 2013, less than 300 days after her termination, Figura timely

filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division

and EEOC.

15. Figura thereafter obtained her Right to Sue Notice issued April 30, 2014, which is

attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference.

16. This suit is timely within 90 days after receipt of Plaintiff's Right to Sue Notice

from the EEOC.

VI. CAUSES OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all prior paragraphs, as if fully set forth herein.

18. Defendant harassed, discriminated, and retaliated against Plaintiff, and failed to

provide a reasonable accommodation, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act

("ADA"), because of her disability or perceived disability of being allergic to cayenne pepper.

19. Defendant was at all relevant times Plaintiffs "employer" within the meaning of

the ADA and employed the requisite number of persons to qualify as an employer under that

Act.

3 3

13. Meanwhile, a Rowlett Police Department officer Bennie Holmes was allowed to

continue working for the Department, despite his intolerance for pepper spray due to LASIK

surgery.

V.

ADMINISTRATIVE PREREQUISITES SATISFIED

14. On November 14, 2013, less than 300 days after her termination, Figura timely

filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division

and EEOC.

15. Figura thereafter obtained her Right to Sue Notice issued April 30, 2014, which is

attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference.

16. This suit is timely within 90 days after receipt of Plaintiffs Right to Sue Notice

from the EEOC.

VI.

CAUSES OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all prior paragraphs, as if fully set forth herein.

18. Defendant harassed, discriminated, and retaliated against Plaintiff, and failed to

provide a reasonable accommodation, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA), because of her disability or perceived disability of being allergic to cayenne pepper.

19. Defendant was at all relevant times Plaintiffs employer within the meaning of

the ADA and employed the requisite number of persons to qualify as an employer under that

Act.

VIOLATION OF TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964

20. Defendant harassed, discriminated, and retaliated against Plaintiff in violation of

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

21. Defendant was at all relevant times Plaintiff's "employer" within the meaning of

the Title VII and employed the requisite number of persons to qualify as an employer under that

Act.

VII. DAMAGES AND ATTORNEYS' FEES

22. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all prior paragraphs, as if fully set forth herein.

23. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's actions, Plaintiff has suffered and

will continue to suffer damages including, but not limited to, humiliation, shame, fright, mental

anguish, lost wages, and lost earning capacity.

24. In addition, because Defendant's conduct was intentional and malicious, Plaintiff

is entitled to recover punitive/exemplary damages from Defendant in an amount to be

determined by the jury.

25. Defendant's wrongful conduct has made it necessary for Plaintiff to retain the

undersigned attorneys to represent her in bringing and prosecuting this action, and, if necessary,

for legal representation on appeal. Plaintiff therefore seeks recovery of all reasonable attorneys'

fees and costs pursuant to Title VII and the ADA.

VIII. JURY DEMAND

26. Plaintiff demands a trial by jury and files the appropriate jury fee concurrently with

filing of this Original Petition.

4 4

VIOLATION OF TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964

20. Defendant harassed, discriminated, and retaliated against Plaintiff in violation of

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

21. Defendant was at all relevant times Plaintiffs employer within the meaning of

the Title VII and employed the requisite number of persons to qualify as an employer under that

Act.

VII.

DAMAGES AND ATTORNEYS FEES

22. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all prior paragraphs, as if fully set forth herein.

23. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants actions, Plaintiff has suffered and

will continue to suffer damages including, but not limited to, humiliation, shame, fright, mental

anguish, lost wages, and lost earning capacity.

24. In addition, because Defendants conduct was intentional and malicious, Plaintiff

is entitled to recover punitive/exemplary damages from Defendant in an amount to be

determined by the jury.

25. Defendants wrongful conduct has made it necessary for Plaintiff to retain the

undersigned attorneys to represent her in bringing and prosecuting this action, and, if necessary,

for legal representation on appeal. Plaintiff therefore seeks recovery of all reasonable attorneys

fees and costs pursuant to Title VII and the ADA.

VIII.

JURY DEMAND

26. Plaintiff demands a trial by jury and files the appropriate jury fee concurrently with

filing of this Original Petition.

IX. PRAYER

27. Plaintiff prays that Defendants be cited to appear and answer in this suit and that,

upon final trial, she be awarded all damages allowed by law, including actual damages, non-

pecuniary damages, exemplary damages, attorneys' fees, costs of court, pre- and post judgment

interest at the maximum lawful rate, and all other relief to which she may be entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

Hessam Parzivand TBA #24071157 The Parzivand Law Firm, PLLC 10701 Corporate Dr. Suite 185 Stafford, Texas 77477 T: [832] 349-1776 F: [832] 602-2721

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF, ANGELA FIGURA

5 5

IX.

PRAYER

27. Plaintiff prays that Defendants be cited to appear and answer in this suit and that,

upon final trial, she be awarded all damages allowed by law, including actual damages, non-

pecuniary damages, exemplary damages, attorneys fees, costs of court, pre- and post-judgment

interest at the maximum lawful rate, and all other relief to which she may be entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

_____________________________________

Hessam Parzivand TBA #24071157

The Parzivand Law Firm, PLLC

10701 Corporate Dr.

Suite 185

Stafford, Texas 77477

T: [832] 349-1776

F: [832] 602-2721

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF,

ANGELA FIGURA

HessamHessam Parzivand

EXHIBIT 1

EXHIBIT 1

(Date Matted) I ;71

O. 'NT

ORTONITN

DISMISSAL AND O TICE OF RIGHTS To Angela M. Figura

7505 Westhaven Dr. Rowlett, TX 75089

FrCln- San Antonio Field Office 5410 Fredericksburg Rd Suite 200 San Antonio, TX 78229

On behalf of person(s) aggnevedi.vhose identity ,s CONFIDENTIAL (29 CFR 1601.7(a))

EEOC Charge

EEOC Representative

Jaime Valdez, State & Local Coordinator

Telephone No

(210) 281-7661

31C-2014-00109

THE EEOC IS CLOSING ITS FILE ON THIS CHARGE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON: The facts alleged in the charge fail to state a claim under any of the statutes enforced by the EEOC.

Your allegations did not involve a disability as defined by the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The Respondent employs less than the required number of employees or is not otherwise covered by the statutes.

Your charge was not timely filed with EEOC; in other words, you waited too long after the date(s) of the alleged discrimination to file your charge The EEOC issues the following determination: Based upon its investigation, the EEOC is unable to conclude that the information obtained establishes violations of the statutes. This does not certify that the respondent is in compliance with the statutes. No finding is made as to any other issues that might be construed as having been raised by this charge. The EEOC has adopted the findings of the state or local fair employment practices agency that investigated this charge.

- NOTICE OF SUIT RIGHTS - (See the additional information attached to this form.)

Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act: This will be the only notice of dismissal and of your right to sue that we will send you. You may file a lawsuit against the respondent(s) under federal law based on this charge in federal or state court. Your lawsuit must be filed WITHIN 90 DAYS of your receipt of this notice; or your right to sue based on this charge will be lost. (The time limit for filing suit based on a claim under state law may be different.)

Equal Pay Act (EPA): EPA suits must be filed in federal or state court within 2 years (3 years for willful violations) of the alleged EPA underpayment. This means that backpay due for any violations that occurred more than 2 years (3 years} before you file suit may not be collectible.

On b elf fi the CorTut sion

Enclosures(s) O. Hicks, irector

cc: ROWLETT POLICE DEPT.

c/o Joe C. TooleylAttorneys Counselors Attn: Joe C, Tooley/Attorney 510 Turtle Cove, Blvd., Ste 112 Rockwell, TX 75087