theida salazar sbn: 295547 law offices of...
TRANSCRIPT
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 1 of 26
1 THEIDA SALAZAR SBN: 295547 LAW OFFICES OF THEIDA SALAZAR
2 2140 North Hollywood Way #7 192 Burbank, CA 91510
3 Telephone: (818) 433-7290
4 Facsimile: (818) 436-4009 salazarlawgroup@ gmail.com
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff, HOW ARD HOLT 6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
HOW ARD HOLT, an individual,
Plaintiff,
V.
CITY OF OAKLAND, a government entity; OAKLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT, a government entity; DARREN WHITE in his official and individual capacities; and Does 1 through 50,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1. Negligence; 2. Breach of Contract; 3. Breach of Implied Covenant of Good
Faith and Fair Dealing; 4. Race and Age Discrimination, Cal.
Gov. Code§ 12940 (a) et seq.; 5. Retaliation, Cal. Gov. Code§ 12940
(a) et seq.; 6. Failure to prevent Discrimination,
Cal. Gov. Code§ 12940 (a) et seq.; 7. Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Racial
Discrimination; 8. Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Retaliation; 9. Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Racial
Discrimination; 10. Violationof42 U.S.C. § 1981
Retaliation; 11. Intentional Infliction of Emotional
Distress; and 12. Tortious Interference with Economic
Advantage
REQUEST FOR PUNITICE DAMAGES PLAINTIFF DEMANDS JURY TRIAL
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 2 of 26
Plaintiff Howard Holt ("plaintiff Holt" or "Captain Holt") by and through his
2 attorneys allege as follows:
3
4
5 INTRODUCTION
6 1. PlaintiffHOLT HAS BEEN SERVING the city of Oakland, California as a
7 firefighter for 27 years. In 2000 he was promoted to Lieutenant and in 2003 he
8
9 was promoted to Captain. Captain Holt served in multiple capacities during his
10 27-year tenure including but not limited to defendant OFD's Bart Committee,
11 CZ::~ <-~~o 12 < >;;; ~<; Vl 3: <
13 <oz: :: 0 CZ:: woo ::: ~ ... 14 I- -.... ..l ..l 0 ..:ii:) Vl 0 • 15 l<I :i: ::.i::
High Rise Committee, and its Open House Project as well as mentored local
youth via the OFD/YMCA mentoring program.
2. Outside of serving the citizens of Oakland for over a quarter of a century in an
esteemed and professional regard, Plaintiff is a 58-year old loving father and a u z - ::c < .... I- CQ
16 .... CZ:: a: 0 0 ;:J
?;: ~ CQ <.,,. 17 ..l -N
husband of 29 years. Plaintiff has a daughter who is a professional athlete in
Switzerland and a son who was convicted of arson in December 2017, which is 18
the subject of this complaint. 19
20 JURISDICITON AND VENUE
21 3. This action arises under 42 U.S.C. §§ 198l(A), 2000 AND 1983. Plaintiff Holt
22 invokes jurisdiction over his federal claim pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 23
§ 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343. The acts and practices that are the subject of this 24
25 complaint, occurred in the County of Alameda, California, within this judicial
26 district.
27 4. Jurisdiction over plaintiffs state law claims is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. §
28 1367. The state law claims are related to the claims brought pursuant to the
- I -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 3 of 26
original jurisdiction of the court and form part of the same case and controversy
2 under Article III of the United States Constitution.
3
4 5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over all defendants as the legal violations
5 occurred in Alameda County, and the defendants conduct business in Alameda
6 County, which is located within this judicial district.
7
8 6. Assignment to the San Francisco Division of the United States District Court for
9 the Northern District of California is appropriate pursuant to Northern District
10 Local Rule 3-2(d).
11 ci:: ~ <: -N~c 12 <;;..iii ~ < ;:: (./) ?: <:
13 <:Q-e o ii IOI 0 0 :c ~"'" 14 !- .... ::3 "'" .... <: 0 .... u (./) 0 . 15 IOI: ;:,i:: u z - :c <: "'"I-= 16 "'"ci:: ci:: 0 0 :i ~~= <: ..,. 17 .... -M
PARTIES
7. Plaintiff Holt is a United States Citizen. Plaintiff Holt is an African American
male. Plaintiff Holt has worked for defendants City of Oakland and OFD for 27
years. Plaintiff Holt has exhausted all administrative remedies. Plaintiff Holt filed
a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing
18 ("DFEH") on or about June 14, 2018. Plaintiffs right to sue letter was issued by
19 the DFEH on November 7, 2018 and Plaintiff Holt assigned and closed DFEH
20 Case Number 201806-02644319.
21 8. Defendant City of Oakland ("City") is and at all times mentioned herein, a public
22
23 entity organized and existing under the laws of the State of California.
24 9. Defendant Oakland Fire Department ("OFD") is now and at all times mentioned
25 herein, a department within the city of Oakland."
26 10. Defendant Darren White ("Defendant White") is an employee and agent of
27
28 Defendant City of Oakland. Defendant Darren White is the Fire Chief of the OFD
- 2 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 4 of 26
and was plaintiff Holt's supervisor at times material to this complaint. Defendant
2 Darren White acted within the scope of his employment and agency with the
3
4 Defendant City of Oakland and Defendant OFD at all times. Plaintiff Holt sues
5 defendant Darren White in his official and individual capacity.
6 11 . The true names and capacities of defendants named as DOES 1 through 50,
7 inclusive, are presently unknown to plaintiff, who therefore sues said individual
8
9 and corporate entity defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this
10 Complaint when that information is discovered. Plaintiff is informed and
I I a:~ <-N ~:: 12 < >- "' ~ < ;: "" ::: < 13 <o;z = 0 a: woo ::i: ~ t... 14 ..... -t... ...l ...l 0 ...l <5 ""0 . 15 w :: ::.::
believes, and on that basis alleges, that each of the fictitious defendants has
participated in the acts alleged herein.
12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all relevant
times, each defendant, whether named or fictitious, was the agent or employee of u .,. ;z ii:!==< t... a:= 16 0 0 a:
z ::> ~ = ~~ 17 - ....
each of the other defendants, and in doing the things alleged to have been done in
the complaint, acted within the scope of such agency or employment, or ratified 18
the acts of the others and each of the fictitious defendants participated as alleged 19
20 herein.
21
22 FACTS 23
13. Defendant OFD MOU Section 4.4.2.4 provides Bargaining unit members with th 24
25 greatest department seniority who have (1) attained a fully effective of better
26 overall performance appraisal (2) completed the course work to be eligible for
27 testing to the promoted rank, (3) attained the applicable and effective Department
28
- 3 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 5 of 26
certification denied Fire Department policy, and ( 4) are eligible to take the
2 promotional exam shall be assigned to an acting higher rank position.
3
4 14. Maria Sabatini was Acting Assistant Fire Marshall (hereinafter "AAFM") from
5 January 2017-December 2017 when she retired from defendant City.
6 15.Accordingly, the AAFM position is then offered in order-based upon a list of
7 qualified members in order of seniority (A true and correct copy of the list is
8
9 attached (Exhibit I)).
10 16.As Captain Lawrence Hom, was next on the list, based on seniority, he was
11 et:~ < -~ !;t ~ 12 <;;..I/') ...l < -< - °' (/) ~<
13 <Q-QOZ - 0 et: t.J ~ 0 ::c: ~ ~ 14 ......... :s ~ ..J < o ..J u Cl) 0 . 15 t.J = ::.i::
offered the AAFM position. Captain Hom declined the appointment and called
Plaintiff Holt and informed him he was not accepting the position and that by
way of seniority and hierarchy, as well as Defendant OFD's appointment
protocol, Plaintiff would be offered the position. u -z --< ~ ..... cc
16 ~et: et: 0 0 ::> :s: ~ cc <~ 17 ...l -N
17. Plaintiff Holt has been an employee of defendant City for twenty-seven years,
serving in numerous positions with its Fire Department, working his way up the 18
ranks from firefighter to Captain. 19
20 18. On or about December 9, 201 7 Plaintiff Holt's son was convicted of arson in
21 Napa County Superior Court.
22 19. On or about December 15, 2017, Eric Logan (Battalion Chief) called Plaintiff
23 Holt and offered him the position of Acting Assistant Fire Marshall, which he
24
25 accepted.
26 20. On or about January 2, 2018 Plaintiff HOLT was informed by Battalion Chief
27 Logan that defendant City was rescinding its December 15, 2017 offer. Plaintiff
28 was in Puerto Vallarto, Mexico, with his wife on vacation and requested to
- 4 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 6 of 26
address this matter upon his return. Nevertheless, Battalion Chief Logan told
2 Captain Holt, he would not be offered the AAFM position because of "what is
3
4 going on with your son" .
5 21. On or about January 8, 2018 Communication #01-18 was issued to all staff by
6 defendant OFD stating "the current operation and Support Services
7 Administration Officer, Firefighter-Paramedic Emmanuel Watson will be serving
8
9 as Acting Assistant Fire Marshall.
10 22. On or about January 15, 2018 defendant Darren White was at a Firefighter Union
11 a: ~ <-N~c= 12 <;;..;;; ~ <;; Vl ~ <
13 <o-:: 0 ~ t.l 0 0 :i: ~"" 14 !- -""...l ...l 0 ...l ('5 Vl 0 • 15 i;ol = ~
sponsored basketball tournament at Merit College and approached by Plaintiff
Holt who inquired why he rescinded the position. Defendant White stated,
"because of what's going on with your son", he would not be allow in the
position. u :i: z ;:- !- < ~ a: = 16 0 0 f5 :::: ~ = <..,, 17 ...l -N
23. Captain Holt then inquired "do you even know what happened", "he was
framed". Captain Holt then stated, "I wish you would have talked to me and got 18
the facts before making a decision like that". Defendant White then rebuffed "I 19
20 know how it is, my father went to prison".
21 24.PlaintiffHolt walked away from defendant White and was approached by Union
22 Steward, Jim Whitty and Plaintiff discussed the conversation he had with 23
defendant White and Whitty stated "he can't do that", in reference to the actions 24
25 of defendant White.
26 25 . Later that day at the basketball tournament, Local 55 President Don Robertson
27 and Plaintiff were discussing the Assistant Fire Marshall Position and what
28 defendant White stated. President Robertson stated Defendant White could not
- 5 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 7 of 26
offer the position to someone else and asked Plaintiff if he wanted him to talk
2 with defendant White; Plaintiff responded "yes, because I want the position" .
3
4 26. On or about January 16, 2018 Plaintiff and President Robertson had a follow up
5 discussion with Plaintiff and informed him that "Chief White said he is not
6 putting you into that position and if you push it, he will change the process and
7 just leave the position open until they give a test".
8
9 27. On or about January 22, 2018 Plaintiff took the written test for Battalion Chief.
10 28. On or about January 23, 2018 Plaintiff filed a grievance regarding the Acting
11 a::~ <-N~~ 12 < > an ...l < -< > C\ <n ... <.
13 <. Q z e o a:: '-l 0 0 ::: ~"" 14 f- .... :i ~ ..J < 0 ...l u <n 0 ':!l 15 '-l =
Assistant Fire Marshall Position ("AAFM") not being given to him, when it
should have based upon Defendant OFD protocol, guidelines and standards. The
grievance was also filed based upon the statements of Defendant White.
29. On or about February 2, 2018, defendant White did change the process to be u..,. :z - - <. "" f- a:i 16 ""a:: a: 0 0 ::;) ~ ! a:i <. ...,. 17 ...l -N
AAFM, as he stated he would to President Robertson just two weeks prior.
Defendant OFD issued communication # 12-18 was issued announcing Defendant 18
OFD would be making a provisional appointment for the Assistant Fire Marshall, 19
20 (Sworn) assignment until completion of the recruitment for the position and
21 invited interested members must apply for the provisional opportunity with a
22 deadline of February 16, 2018 (Exhibit II). 23
30. On or about February 6, 2018 Defendant White denied the Plaintiff's grievance. 24
25 31. On or about February 15, 2018 Captain Holt applied for the Assistant Fire
26 Marshall (Sworn) assignment.
27 32. On or about February 22, 2018 a Step 3 meeting was held with Charles Garcia
28 IAFF, Plaintiff Holt, and Janelle Smith of Employee Relations and it was
- 6 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 8 of 26
confirmed that there was "no reason stated" as to why Plaintiff was denied the
2 opportunity to Act Higher Rank.
3
4 33. On or about February 25, 2018 Defendant OFD issued a Communications
5 specifying Emmanuel Watson would not be serving in the capacity of AAFM.
6 34. Captain Holt consistently received favorable employee evaluations and
7 consistently received favorable reports of performance and was never adversely
8
9 rated in evaluations. Moreover, his work ethic was continuously identified as
10 exceptional.
II CZ::~ <-N t- .: 12 <,.. -...l >.,. < < ;: Cl)~~
13 <Q-QOZ -oci:: t.l - 0 :r:: .... '"' 14 ~ > ::::s '"'...l < 0 ...l u Cll 0 • 15 lol = ~ u .... z - ;- < ""' .... cc 16 ""'CZ:: e::: 0 0 ::i ~ ~ cc < ... 17 ...l -N
35. Lieutenant Felicia Bryant was "appointed" AAFM April 2018.
36. On or about June 8, 2018 Battalion Chief ("B.C.") Logan offered the AAFM
position to Captain Holt and stated, "you won your grievance" and you "start
Monday June 11, 2018". Captain Holt inquired "what did I win" as the position
was designated for him in December 2017. B.C. Logan responded, "you have to
call your Union Rep" (Lieutenant Chuck Garcia) and ask him. 18
37. Immediately after the call, Plaintiff called Lieutenant Garcia and informed him of 19
20 the conversation with B.C. Logan. Lieutenant Garcia was unaware of the offer
21 and called the City Attorney's Office, who stated Plaintiff could start the position
22 June 11, 2018 ifhe would release the Defendants, and each of them, from any 23
liability. 24
25 38.However, due to his morals, values, and the fact he was the only African-
26 American Male on the list of qualified members in order of seniority, Captain
27 Holt believed it wrong if he accepted the offer, after the fact.
28
- 7 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 9 of 26
39. On or about June 14, 2018 Captain Holt filed a claim with CA Department of Fai
2 Employment and Housing (Case# 201806-02644319) and the EEOC (#27A-
3
4 2019-00102-C).
5 40. This situation created by defendants, and each of them created a Hostile Work
6 Environment for Plaintiff, as he was denied promotional opportunities (due to his
7 race and or age), retaliated against, and made a mockery of- after 27 years of
8 excellent service.
9
10 41. Defendants White and OFD tainted defendant City's administration and called
11 0:: ~ <-j~= 12 .. ->"' < ~;: rJ'J::: < 13 <c-coz - 0 0:: "" ~ 0 :::c ... "'" 14 E-'.>-"'"...l ...l 0 ...l ~ Cl) 0 • 15 "" =::.::
into question the integrity of Captain Holt, his ability to lead, and usurped his
authority before his peers and subordinates.
42. Defendant White abused his position and Defendant's City and OFD put Captain
Holt in a position where he will not be able to participate as a regular member of u ... z --< "'"E- = 16 to. 0:: 0:: 0 0 ;:i ::: ~ = < "<t' 17 ...l -N
defendant OFD in the future.
43. Moreover, Defendant White' s willful disregard of Captain Holt's designation of 18
the position by seniority, consistent with MOU provision 4.4.2.4 was an action to 19
20 deny a promotion to a properly qualified African American which is
21 discriminatory, unlawful, wrong, and worthy of imposition of punitive damages.
22
23
24 CAUSES OF ACTION
25
26 FIRSTCAUSE OF ACTION
27 (Negligence Against All Defendants)
28
- 8 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 10 of 26
44. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates the factual allegations set forth in the
2 preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
3
4 45. Defendants City and OFD, had a duty to use ordinary care in ensuring that
5 Captain Holt was not harmed in their employ. 6
46. Defendants and each of them breached their duty to Captain Holt and as a result, 7
8 he was harmed and suffered damages.
9 4 7. Defendants City and OFD breached their duty to comply with the Bargaining
10 Agreement entered into between Defendants COO and OFD as Plaintiff Holt was
11 a: ~ <( -N ~ :: 12 < >.,., ..l < -< >"' en .. <
13 <c;z e Oo::: ""Oo ?= ~::: 14 I"" ..l '"'..l < 0 ..l u gJ ~ ~ 15 u-z ii:;"'< '"'ii= 16 0 0 e: ~ :z; <~ 17 ..l-
"'
a third-party beneficiary to which a duty was owed as he was privy to the
agreement.
48. Defendants City and OFD breached their duty to properly supervise Defendant
White and prevent him discriminating and retaliating against Plaintiff Holt and
acting in a manner to cause harm to Plaintiff.
18 49. Defendants City, OFD, and White breached a duty owed to Plaintiff to fully and
19 fairly investigate all grievances, including but not limited to Plaintiff Holt's
20 grievance, which was denied on February 6, 2018.
21 50. Defendants, and each of them, breached the above duties by failing or refusing to
22
23 adequately or properly investigate the grievance made by Plaintiff, by denying
24 such grievance, and by failing to Protect Plaintiff from Discrimination and
25 Retaliation.
26 51. Defendant White also breached its duty to Captain Holt by failing to promote him
27
28 accordingly, consistent with M.0.U. 4.4.2.4.
- 9 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 11 of 26
52. As a direct, proximate and foreseeable result of Defendants negligence, and each
2 of them, Plaintiff Holt has suffered special and compensatory damages, great
3
4 mental anguish and physical distress including emotional distress, discomfort,
5 anxiety, annoyance, and inconvenience. Accordingly, Plaintiff Holt seeks genera
6 and special damages against Defendants in an amount according to proof at trial.
7
8
9
10 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
11 IX ~ <: -N~= 12 < >.,, ~<~ (/) ::: <:
13 <o-ooz - 0 IX ll;l - 0 = ~'"" 14 f- -'""..J ~ 0 ..Ju (/) 0 • 15 '-l = ::.i:: u ... z ... - < '""f- = 16 '"" IX IX 0 0 ::J
~!= <..,. 17 ..J -....
(Breach of Contract Against All Defendants)
5 3. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates the factual allegations set forth in the
preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein.
54. Defendant OFD offered the AAFM position to Plaintiff, which he accepted, then
Defendant rescinded the offer and placed a lesser qualified individual in the
18 position (Emmanuel Watson).
19 55 . Defendants offer and Plaintiffs acceptance constituted a contract that was
20 breached. This breach proximately caused the harm incurred by Captain Holt.
21
22 56.PlaintiffHolt is also a third-party beneficiary of Defendants City and the
23 International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 55 entering into a
24 Collective Bargaining Agreement ("Agreement") regarding Plaintiff Holt's
25
26 position, benefits, and services.
27 57. Under the terms of the Agreement, Defendants City and OFD had a duty to use
28 ordinary care in complying with the Agreement. The Agreement also provides
- 10 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 12 of 26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 a: ~ <-N~Q 12 < >;;; ~ < ;: <I) ::"; <
13 <Q-Qo~ ~90 ~ ~ :: 14 ... ..J ..J 0 ..J <5 <I) 0 . 15 ~ = ::.i: u-z - ..... < ... !- = 16 ... a: a: 00~ ~~= <..,. 17 ..J -M
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
that Defendants City and OFD will fully and fairly investigate all grievances in
accordance with the agreement.
58. The Agreement also provides for zero liability protection for discriminatory
practices and unauthorized discretions.
59. Plaintiff Holt has performed and continues to perform all his obligations in an
impeccable manner, except those obligations that have been excused, of which
performance was impossible, or that have been prevented by Defendants.
60. Defendants City and OFD breached the Agreement by failing to adequately or
properly investigate the January 23, 2018 grievance made by Plaintiff Holt, by
denying such grievance, and by failing to adhere to the terms and conditions of
the Agreement.
61. As a direct, proximate, and foreseeable result of Defendants breach of the
Agreement, Plaintiff has incurred compensatory damages in an amount to be
proven at trial.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Against All Defendants)
62. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
63. Defendant OFD breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by
offering Plaintiff the AAFM position which was then rescinded as alleged in
paragraph 2 7.
64. Plaintiff Holt has performed all acts required of him under the duties and
obligations he swore in an oath to uphold for Defendants City and OFD.
- 11 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 13 of 26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11 c:i: ~ <-N l;i; o 12 j >;;; < <;; Vl :::: <
13 <o-oo~ -o-:;: - 0
14 i= ~::; i:.....:; -0 ...l 25 Vl 0 . 15 '"' = ::i:: u :c ;z ~ !-- < i:.. c:i: = 16 0 0 c:: z ;;;i ~o= <..,. 17 ...l -.....
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
65. Defendant OFD offered the AAFM position to Plaintiff, which he accepted, then
Defendant rescinded the offer and placed a lesser qualified individual in the
position (Emmanuel Watson) and then removed Watson from the position and
altered the selection process to manipulate the fact they had discriminated against
Captain Holt.
66. Defendants and each of them breached their duties to Plaintiff in bad faith and
chose to discriminate against Captain Holt and treat him differently because of
his race and age even though Plaintiff was the proper appointee based on
Defendants own protocol, guidelines, and standards.
67. As a proximate result of Defendants, and each of their breaches of the implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing, Plaintiff Holt has suffered compensatory
and consequential damages in an amount according to proof at trial.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Racial and Age Discrimination Against Defendants City of Oakland and Oakland Fire
Department pursuant to California Government Code Section et. Seq. 12940 et seq.)
68. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
69. Defendants City and OFD intentionally discriminated against Captain Holt on the
basis of his race and/or age and forced him to work under conditions that other
employees were not subject to.
70. Defendants City and OFD are an employer subject to California Government
Code§ 12940 et seq.
- 12 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 14 of 26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 a: ~ <-N 1;;; = 12 < >;;:; ~ < ;: en ~ <
13 <o-Qo~ ~l?o ~~~ 14 .... ..J ..J 0 ..J ~ en 0 , 15 l;l = ::.i:: u ... ;z ii:~< .... a:= 16 oo~ ~~iii <..,. 17 ..J -....
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
71 . Defendants to this cause of action discriminated against Captain Holt by failing t
promote him based on his race and age.
72. Defendants to this cause of action otherwise discriminated against Captain Holt
by failing to promote him as alleged in this complaint on the basis of his race and
age, through its employees, agents, and assigns.
73. Plaintiff is an African American Male and is fifty-eight years of age which was a
substantial factor behind Defendants refusal to promote Captain Holt.
74. Defendants unlawful conduct as alleged herein constitutes a violation of
California Government Code§ 12940 et seq.
75. Plaintiff Holt has been harmed by the discriminatory and unlawful conduct
inflicted upon him.
76. Defendants to this cause of action were a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff
harm.
77. The above conduct by Defendant was a scheme intended to defraud the public .
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Retaliation Against Defendants City of Oakland and Oakland Fire Department pursuant to
California Government Code Section et seq. 12940 et seq.)
78. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
79. Defendants to this cause of action retaliated against Plaintiff Holt after he filed a
grievance against Defendants White and OFD on the grounds of discrimination
that he was subject to and forced to endure disparate treatment.
80. Captain Holt was repeatedly denied his rightful promotion based on the unlawful
- 13 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 15 of 26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 a:~ <-N~o 12 < >;;:; ~<~ V> :i: <
13 <Q-QOZ -oci:: t.i 0 :c ~"" 14 !-- -""...l ..J 0 ...l ~ V> 0 • 15 t.i = ~ u ... z ~ f: < i;.. a:= 16 0 0 a: ::: ~ ~ <""' 17 ...l -N
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
discrimination and retaliation against him for asserting his tight to properly be
promoted.
81. Defendants, and each of them, retaliated against Plaintiff and denied plaintiff his
rightful promotion.
82. Furthermore, Plaintiff alleges that the interview process for the position was
altered and the interviewing committee was changed in an effort to preclude
fairness and equity.
83. Plaintiff Hold was harmed by defendant's unlawful conduct.
84. Defendants retaliation was a substantial factor in causing his harm and Plaintiff
seeks the relief prayed for herein.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Racial Discrimination)
(Against Defendant Darrin White)
85 . Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
86. Defendant White acted under color of state law in causing the harm alleged
herein.
87. By the conduct alleged herein, Defendant White willfully and without
justification deprived Plaintiff Holt of his rights, privileges and immunities as
secured to him by the laws and Constitution of the United States. All
Constitutional rights covered, specifically including the due process and equal
protection rights as afforded by the 14th (Fourteenth Amendment) in violation of
42 U.S.C. § 1983. WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for the relief as set forth herein.
- 14 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 16 of 26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 C:: M
<~ N !jj; <=> 12 < ;;.. ;n ...l < -< - "' rJ'J::.: <
13 <Q;z :: 0 c:: t.l 0 0 ::i: ~ '- 14 ..... -'- ...l ~ 0 ...l u en 0 • 15 t.l :i: " u ... :z --..i: '- ..... CQ 16 '- c:: c:: oo ~ ~~= <..,,. 17 ...l -M
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Racial Discrimination)
(Against Defendant Darrin White)
88. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
89. Defendant White acted under color of state law in causing the harm alleged
herein.
90. By the conduct alleged herein, Defendant White intentionally, willfully and
without justification, did retaliate against Plaintiff Holt because of his protective
activity in opposing racial, ethnic, and age discrimination in violation of 42
U.S.C. § 1983. WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for the relief as set forth herein .
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Racial Discrimination)
(Against All Defendants)
91. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
92. Plaintiff confronted Defendant OFD Chief White about the discrimination he was
perpetrating against him in refusing to promote him based on his race.
93. Plaintiff filed a grievance with Defendant City and informed Defendant OFD
Chief White that he would pursue his legal rights if he continued his
discrimination against him based on age and race.
94. In response, Defendant OFD Chief White retaliated against Plaintiff further and
refused to promote him and tampered with the interview process.
- 15 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 17 of 26
95. Plaintiff Holt engaged in protected activity, and Defendant OFD Chief White
2 knew Plaintiff was engaged in protected activity when he decided to retaliate
3
4 against him.
5 96. As a result of engaging in protected activity, Defendants retaliated against
6 Plaintiff Holt in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for
7 the relief as set forth herein.
8
9 NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
10 (Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Retaliation)
11 0:: ~
;s ~ ~ 12 j;;...,, < ~ ;, en ~ < 13 <: Q-QOZ - 0 0:: w 0 :::: ~'"' 14 f- -'"'..J ~ o ..J u en 0 • 15 w =~ u ... z --< '"' f- CQ 16 '"' 0:: ..... 005 ~ ! CQ <...,. 17 ..J -N
(Against All Defendants)
97. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
98. Plaintiff confronted Defendant OFD Chief White about the discrimination he was
perpetrating against him in refusing to promote him based on his age and race.
99. Plaintiff filed a grievance with Defendant City and informed Defendant OFD 18
19 Chief White that he would pursue his legal rights if he continued his
20 discrimination against him based on age and race.
21 100. In response, Defendant OFD Chief White retaliated against Plaintiff
22 further and refused to promote him and tampered with the interview process.
23 101. Plaintiff Holt engaged in protected activity, and Defendant OFD Chief
24
25 White knew Plaintiff was engaged in protected activity when he decided to
26 retaliate against him.
27
28
- 16 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 18 of 26
102. As a result of engaging in protected activity, Defendants retaliated against
2 Plaintiff Holt in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 . WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for
,, ..)
the relief as set forth herein. 4
5
6 TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
7
8 (Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Racial Discrimination)
9 (Against All Defendants)
10 103. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
11 ci:: ~ <-N ~ <:> 12 < > ;;; ..J < -< > "' V'l , <
13 <c-co z - 0 ci::
~~~ 14 f- ... :::3 loo ..J < 0 ..Ju V'l 0 . 15 t.l = ~
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
104. Plaintiff confronted defendant OFD Chief White about the discrimination
he was perpetrating against him in refusing to promote him based on his age and
race. u - z ~ f: < loo a:= 16 0 0 ci::
z;;;;. ~ C> = <..,. 17 ..J -N
105. Plaintiff filed a grievance with defendant City and informed Defendant
OFD Chief White that he would pursue his legal rights if he continued his 18
19 discrimination against him based on age and race.
20 106. In response, defendant OFD Chief White retaliated against Plaintiff
21 further and refused to promote him and tampered with the interview process.
22 107. Plaintiff Holt engaged in protected activity, and defendant OFD Chief
23
24 White knew Plaintiff was engaged in protected activity when he decided to
25 retaliate against him.
26 108. As a result of engaging in protected activity, Defendants retaliated against
27 Plaintiff Holt in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for
28 the relief as set forth herein.
- 17 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 19 of 26
2
..,
.)
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 ~~ <-N~~ 12 < >"' ..J < -< > °' "' .,. < 13 <o;z eo~ ""Oo :I::::: ... 14 !- > :3 ~ ..J < 0 ..Ju "' 0 . 15 ""= ~ u ... z ii: i= < ... ~ c: 16 oo~ ~ 2: cQ <~ 17 ..l -....
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress) 109. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
110. Defendants ' conduct as alleged herein is extreme and outrageous and
designed to inflict emotional distress against the Plaintiff.
111 . Defendants' conduct was deliberate and intentional.
112. Defendants' acts, statements and actions as alleged in this complaint cause
plaintiff to suffer extreme embarrassment, mental and physical anguish and
distress.
113. It was reasonably foreseeable that the defendants' acts, statements and actions
as alleged herein would cause Plaintiff to suffer extreme embarrassment, mental
and physical anguish and distress. WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for relief as ser
forth herein.
TWELTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Interference with Economic Advantage)
Against Defendant White
114. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein
115. Interference with Economic advantage requires an economic relationship
between Plaintiff and a third party; with the probability of future economic
benefit to Plaintiff; Defendant' s knowledge of the relationship; and their
intentional, wrongful acts designed to disrupt the relationship; and actual
- 18 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 20 of 26
disruption, and proximately caused economic harm.
2 116. CA Law allows for the recovery of damages for the intentional interference with an
3 at-will-employment relation and Plaintiff asserts that Defendant White engaged in an
4
5 independently wrongful act, as required to recover damages for tortious interference.
6 117. Captain Holt is in the golden years of his career and was respected and revered by
7 many. Nevertheless, Defendant White sought to disrupt the growth, development, and
8 trajectory of Plaintiffs career and was aware of his actions and the consequences they
9 would have on the career of Captain Holt.
10 118. Defendant Whites actions have proximately caused Captain Holt harm, precluded hi
11 0:: ~ <-N~o 12 < >;;:; ..J < -< > °' Cl'l .... < 13 <o-oo z - 0 0::
~~~ 14 ........ ::i ""..J < o ..Ju <:ll 0 . 15 '"' =::.::
economic growth, and hindered the advancement of his career which will have a lifelong
domino effect on his earnings.
119. Defendant White is the substantial factor in the harm suffered by Plaintiff and as a
result, he must struggle to put the pieces of his career back together and regain the trust u ... z 10: ~ < ""0:: = 16 0 0 0::
z ::i ::: 0 = <..., 17 ..J -
"'
and confidence of his rank and file Fire Fighters and superior alike.
120. Defendant White was well aware of the hierarchy of the appointment system to
18 AAFM and it wasn't until he had to appoint an African American male that he thought
19 he needed to attempt to do everything in his power to change the process.
20
21 121. It was reasonably foreseeable that the defendants' acts, statements and actions
22 as alleged herein would cause Plaintiff embarrassment, mental and physical
23 anguish and distress. WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for relief as ser forth herein.
24 REQUEST FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES
25
26 (California Civil Code§ 3294)
27 122. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
28 contained in the preceding paragraphs as fully set forth herein.
- 19 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 21 of 26
123. Defendants ' conduct as alleged herein is extreme and outrageous and falls
2 within the protection of California Civil Code Section 3294 for the imposition of
3
4 punitive damages against all Defendants.
5 PRAYER
6 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Holt prays as follows:
7
8 1. Promotion to Fire Marshall;
9 2. Retroactive pay from the period plaintiff was denied his proper promotion to the
JO present;
11 3. General and compensatory damages according to proof; """' - °' <-N !ii; :;: 12 <>Ill ...J < -< - °' <.rJ ~ <
13 <o-::o~ ~90
14 - ~""' ........ -; I:. ...J -0 ...J <:) (fl 0 . 15 t.l = ~
4. Special Damages according to proof;
5. Past economic damages according to proof;
6. Future economic damages according to proof;
7. Damages for emotional distress;
u -z i:;:: f:= < "'" a: CQ 16 00§5 ::: ! CQ <...,. 17 ...J -
"'
8. Punitive damages in an amount found reasonable and prudent by the trier of fact;
9. Prejudgment interest at the maxim legal rate;
10. Cost of suit; 18
11. Cost of the proceedings herein; 19 12. Reasonable attorney's fees as permitted by law; and 20 13. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and property.
21 DATED: March 13, 2019 LAW OFFICES OF THEIDA SALAZAR
22
23 By: __ r_~-~--
24 THEIDA SALAZAR
25 Attorney for Plaintiff, HOWARD HOLT
26
27
28
- 20 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 22 of 26
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38, Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on
3
4 all issues triable to a jury in each cause of action of his complaint.
5 DATED: March 13, 2019 LAW OFFICES OF THEIDA SALAZAR
6
7 By:-----'..~_....J<;.~-------'----:?c._-_ THEIDA SALAZAR
8 Attorney for Plaintiff, HOWARD HOLT
9
10
11 a: ~ <-N~~ 12 < >"' -l < -< > C\ "1 .,,.. <
13 < Oz e o a: wo o ..,.. ~ ~ 14 f:: ~ -'- :::; -l 0 -l ~ "1 0 . 15 w =~ u - z - ... < '- !- CQ 16 '- a: a: OO;:;i ::: ~ CQ < .... 17 -l -N
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 2 1 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 23 of 26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 ~~ <-N ~ o 12 < >:;:; ..J < -< - "' Cl') ::::<
13 EXHIBIT I <o -ooz -o~ w 0 ::i:;;. i;:. 14 E--;;: :::s i;:. .J < 0 .J u Cl') 0 . 15 w =~ u z ~= < i;:. a:= 16 005 ~~= < .... 17 .J -N
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 22 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 24 of 26
CITY OF OAKLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT
TO: DL - Fire - All Staff [email protected]
COMMUNICATION NO. 145-16 DATE: October 14, 2016
FROM: Fiscal and Administration Services Division
SUBJECT: ACTING HIGHER RANK ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL (SWORN) - 2016
Fiscal and Administration Services Division is announcing the following personnel as eligible for Acting Higher Rank (AHR) as Assistant Fire Marshal (Sworn). All assignments to act higher rank will be made as per the current Local 55 MOU.
MOU provision 4.4.2.4 AHR Assignment Minimum Qualifications states:
"Bargaining unit members with the greatest department seniority who havf{J (1) attained a fully effective or better overall performance appraisal (2) completed the course work to be eligible for testing to the promoted rank, (3) attained the applicable and effective Department certification defined Fire Department policy, and (4) are eligible to take the promotional exam shall be assigned to an acting higher rank position."
The list of qualified members in order of seniority is:
1. Sabatini, Maria C. 2. Hom, Lawrence S .... 3. Holt, Howard C. 4. Watson, Emmanuel 5. Bryant, Felicia Lee 6. Lightfoot, Charleton D.
APPROVED FOR DISTRIBUTION:
Teresa De Fire Chie
Sonia Lara Acting Fire Division Manager
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 25 of 26
2
...
.J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 EXHIBIT II 0:: ~ <-N Si; ~ 12 <>Ill ~ < ;; en ~ <
13 <o:z :: 0 a:: to;i Oo ::: ~"" 14 f- ::i ""..l < 0 ..l u en 0 . 15 w :c ~ u ... z --<: t... f- cc
16 t... a::,.... oo-z :;i ~o= <"' 17 ..l -....
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 23 -COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 26 of 26
TO:
FROM:
CITY OF OAKLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT
COMMUNICATION N0.12·18 REVISED DATE: February 2, 2018
DL - Fire - All Staff [email protected]
Fiscal & Administration Services Division
SUBJECT: ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL CSWORNl ASSIGNMENT
The Department is currently working With Human Resources Management on preparing an Assistant Fire Marshal (Sworn) recruitment/promotional opportunity. The Fire Chief, with the approval of the Personnel Director, and subject to ratification of the Civil Service Board, may make a provisional appointment in the absence. of an eliglble list. Therefore, during the exam plan ·process, OFD · wil.I make a provi"sional appointment of an interested candidate to the Assistant Fire Marshal (Sworn) position. In accordance with personnel rules, a provisional appointment cannot continue for more than 120 calendar days.
All interested members are encouraged to apply by submitting a 538-8 and resume to me by Friday, February 16, 2018. Interviews of qualified candidates Will occur in late February or early March 2018. Please contact Miguel Trujillo at 238--40"51 if y·ou have any questions regarding the position.
APPROVED FOR DISTRIBUTION:
. ~444,, iJ/Ji Darin White Fire Chief
Trinette Gist Skinner, Fire Division Manager Fiscal & Administration Services Division
JS-CAND 44 (Rev. 06/ 17)
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1-1 Filed 03/14/19 Page 1of1
CIVIL COVER SHEET The JS-CA ND_ 44 civil cover sheet and the information contain~d herein neilher replace nor SU!Jplement the fil ing and s~rvice of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as. p_rov1ded b)'. local rules of court. This fonn , approved m its ongmal fom1 by the Judicial Conference of the Umted States in September 1974, is required for the Clerk of Court to m1tiate the CIVIi docket sheet . (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
DEFENDANTS I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
HOWARD HOLT City of Oakland . Oakland Fire Depa1tment, Darren White, and Does I through 50
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plainti ff (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
OTE: IN LAND CO DEMNATION CASES. USE THE LOCATIO OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
L( C) ....Attorneys. tF.irm N01p.e . .Address..and Telwhone Number) ilw Ut"flces ot The1da ;::.a Jazar, 1 ne1da ;::.a1azar, t::sq. 2140 North Hollywood Way, #7 192 Burbank, CA 91510 818.433.7290
Attorneys (If Known)
Ill. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an "x·· in One Box/or Plaintiff (For Diversity Cases Only) a11d One Box for Defendant)
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an "X"" in One Box Only)
U.S. Government Plaintiff Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
{U.S. Government Not a Part;~ Citizen of This State I Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4 of Business In This State
2 U.S. Government Defendant Citizen of Another State
4 Diversity {Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item Ill)
Citizen or Subject of a Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an ··x" in One Box OnM
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENAL TY I I 0 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Rela1ed Seizure of 120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - Product
Property 21 USC § 881
130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Liability Liabil ity 690 Olher
140 Negotiable Instrument 320 Assault, Libel & Slander 367 Health Care/ LABOR 150 Recovery of 330 Federal Employers'
Phannaceulical Personal 710 Fair Labor Standards Act
Overpayment Of Liability Injury Product Liability
720 Labor/Management Veteran's Benefits 340 Marine 368 Asbestos Personal Injury
Relations I 5 I Medicare Act Product Liability
345 Marine Product Liabili1y 740 Rai lway Labor Act I 52 Recovery of Defaulted
350 Motor Vehicle PERSONAL PROPERTY
75 I Family and Medical Student Loans (Excludes 370 Other Fraud Veterans) 355 Motor Vehicle Product Leave Act
Liabi lity 371 Truth in Lending X 790 Other Labor Litigation 153 Recovery of 360 Other Personal Injury 380 Other Personal Property 791 Employee Retirement Overpayment 362 Perronal Injury -Medical
Damage Income Security Act of Veteran's Benefits Malpractice 385 Propeny Damage Product
IMMIGRATION 160 Stockholders· Suits Liability 190 01her Contract
CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 462 Natural ization
195 Contract Produc1 Liabili ty Application
J 96 Franchise 440 01her Civil Rights HABEAS CORPUS 465 Other Immigration 441 Voting 463 Alien Dciaincc Actions
REAL PROPERTY 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 210 Land Condemna1ion 443 Housing/ Sentence
220 Foreclosure Accommodations 530 General
230 Rent Lease & Ejccnnent 445 Amer. w/Disabilirics- 535 Death Penalty
240 Tons lo Land Employment OTHER
245 Tort Product Liabil ity 446 Amer. w/Disabilirics--Othcr 540 Mandamus & Other
290 All Other Real Property 448 Education 550 Civil Rights
555 Prison Condilion
560 Civil Detainee-Conditions of Confinement
V. 0 RIG IN (Place an "X"" i11 One Box On(v)
2 Incorporaled and Principal Place of Business In Another State Foreign at ion 6 6
BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES 422 Appeal 28 USC § 158 375 False Claims Acl
423 Withdrawal 28 USC 376 Qui Tam (3 1 SC § 157 § 3729(a))
PROPERTY RIGHTS 400 Stale Reapponionment
820 Copyrights 410 Antitrust
830 Patent 430 Ba1lks and Banking
835 Patent- Abbreviated New 450 Commerce
Drug Application 460 Depon ation
840 Trademark 470 Racketeer Influenced &
SOCIAL SECURITY Corrupl Organizations
480 Consumer Credit 861 HlA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/ 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions
865 RSI (405(g)) 89 1 Agricultural Acts
FEDERAL TAX SUITS 893 Environmental Matters
870 Taxes (U.S. Plain1iff or 895 Freedom of lnfomiation
Defendant) Act
871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC 896 Arbitration
§ 7609 899 Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision
950 Constinitional ity of Sta10 Statutes
X I Original Proceeding
2 Removed from StateCoun
3 Remanded from Appclla1e Court
4 Reinstated or Reopened
Transferred from Another District (specify)
6 Multidistrict Litigation- Transfer
Multidistrict Litigation-Direct File
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do 1101 cite i11risdictio11al statutes unless diversitv): 28 U.S.C. § 1331and28 U.S.C. § 1343 Brief descriotion of cause:
Racial Discrimination per 43 U.S.C. §§ 1981 (A) 1983 and 2000
vn. REQUESTED IN CHECKlFTHISISACLASSACTIO DEMAND$ 2qe'.XX:l oov.c>O COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, Fed. R. Civ. P . )
CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint: JURY DEMAND: X Yes No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S), IF ANY (See instructions):
JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
IX. DIVISIONAL ASSIGNMENT (Civil Local Rule 3-2)
(Place an "X" in One Box Only) }< SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND SANJOSE EUREKA-MCKINLEYVILLE
DATE 03/14/2019 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
Case 4:19-cv-01394 Document 1-2 Filed 03/14/19 Page 1of1
AO 440 (Rev. 06112) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the
Northern District of California B
HOWARD HOLT, an individual
--------- -- -- - - ---Plaintiff(s)
V.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Civil Action No.
CITY OF OAKLAND, a government entity; OAKLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT, a government entity; DARREN
WHITE in his official and individual capacities; and Does 1 through 50
Defendant(s)
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To. ,,.D ,,, d 1
• d dd .1 City of Oakland, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 6th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612 • 1, e1 en a11 s name an a ress/ . Oakland Fire Department, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 6th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612
Darren White, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 6th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612 Does 1 through 50
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it)- or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 ( a)(2) or (3) - you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney, whose name and address are: Theida Salazar, Esq.
2140 North Hollywood Way, #7192 Burbank, CA 91510
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
CLERK OF COURT
Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk