: 10-510. Ane @ > onaman a (eaT- mone No,__ 10-1321 pS me, REGINA SMITH, § IN THE DISTRI : § a Pe Plaintiff, 3 iy oe v. § 134t.G suoiciat ois’ iS § ty § CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, § § Defendant. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND JURY DEMAND TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COME NOW, Plaintif, Regina Smith, and file this Original Petition and Jury Demand, and in support of would show as follows: Discovery CONTROL PLAN 1. In accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs request that this Court be set on Discovery Control Plan Level III (3) PARTIES 2. Plaintiff Regina Smith is a resident of Kaufman County, Texas. 3. Defendant City of Dallas is a municipal corporation that may be served with process by serving the City Secretary Deborah Watkins at 1500 Marilla Street Room 5D South, City Hall, Dallas, Texas, 75201. PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND JURY DEMAND Page 1JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This Court has jurisdiction over the Defendant because Defendant is a municipal corporation located in Texas and created under the laws of the State of Texas. 5. Plaintiff timely initiated her complaint by filing same with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), charging of discrimination. Plaintiff received a notice of right to sue from the EEOC within 90 days prior to the filing of this Petition. 6. Venue is proper in Dallas County because all or a substantial part of the events, actions, and omissions giving rise to the claims in this petition occurred in whole or in part in Dallas County, Texas. In addition Defendant maintains its principal office in Dallas County, Texas. 7. Plaintiff requests that this case be designated as a Level Three case for discovery purposes under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 8 On Tuesday, January 6, 2009, Plaintiff's husband, City of Dallas Police Senior Corporal Norman Smith was shot and killed as he attempted to serve an arrest warrant 9. Plaintiff is also a Lieutenant for the City of Dallas Police Department 10. In May 2009, not long after the death of her husband, Plaintiff was denied the position of Deputy Chief of Police by Mary Suhm, City Manager for the City of Dallas, for the stated reason that it was too early in the grief process to promote her Chief Kunkle promised Plaintiff, in the presence of a witness, that she would be promoted at a later date 11, In September 2009, Plaintiff was transferred from the Chief of Police Office to PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND JURY DEMAND Page 2the Southeast Third Watch Patrol Division, which would have been in line with being promoted by Chief Kunkle to the position of Deputy Chief at the Southeast Division, as promised. 12. On January 20, 2010, a white female was promoted to the position of Deputy Chief of the Southeast Division, the position that Plaintiff had been promised by the Chief of Police and which had been denied Plaintiff earlier by the City Manager. Chief Kunkle had stated that the promotion would be awarded to Plaintiff in front of Chief Cato at later date. 13. After the white female was promoted, Chief Kunkle reversed himself and said he had not promised Plaintiff the promotion, despite the fact that he had made the statement in front of a witness. After Plaintiff filed her Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC. the City transferred her to another division in retaliation 14. City of Dallas has discriminated against Plaintiff because of her race~she is black—and because of her sex (gender)—female. City of Dallas has engaged in disparate treatment of Plaintiff based on her race and gender. City of Dallas has improperly retaliated against Plaintiff based on race and gender and assertion of her Tight to be free from discrimination based on race and gender. City acted with malice or with reckless indifference or disregard to the rights of Plaintift. ADMINISTRATIVE PRE-REQUISITES 15. Plaintiff filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division. The EEOC issued its “Right to Sue" letter on June 28, 2010 and PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND JURY DEMAND PagesPlaintiff claims receipt of the "Right to Sue” letter 3 days after issuance, on or about July 1, 2010. Therefore Plaintiff's suit is timely and she has exhausted her administrative remedies. 16. City of Dallas received notice of Plaintiff's claims and responded to the Charge of Discrimination. Cause OF Action: 17. The foregoing conduct, among others, constitutes discrimination under the laws of the State of Texas, including but not limited to the Texas Labor Code, and under federal law, including but not limited to (a) 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and (b) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq. Damaces 18. Asa result of the Defendant's actions, Plaintiff seeks recovery of damages in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this court in this suit as follows: a. _ lost wages in the past; b. future lost wages; ¢. mental anguish; 4. pain and suffering; other reasonable out of pocket expenses; > o exemplary damages, as permitted by law; f. attorney's fees; 9. pre-judgment interest; and post-judgment interest. Jury Request PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND JURY DEMAND Page 419. Plaintiff asserts her right to a jury trial under the Texas and United States Constitution and with this petition is paying her jury fee WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff Regina Smith prays that Defendant named in this lawsuit be cited to appear and answer in this action. Plaintiff further seeks an award for all actual damages found by the trier of fact for her injuries, attorney's fees, exemplary damages as permitted by law, pre-judgment and post- judgment interest as provided by at the highest rate allowed under the law, and for all other relief to which she may be justly entitled, at law or in equity. Respectfully submitted, THE SCHILLER FIRM By Lasik ister fog David A. Schiller, TBN 007946011 John D. Exline, TBN 06758100 Elisse Woelfel, TBN 24058183 2309 W. Parker Road Plano, Texas 75023 Tel: (489) 467-9200 Fax: (469) 467-9600 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION Page 5