Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 12

ZEFF LAW FIRM, LLC

Gregg L. Zeff, Esquire #52648
Eva C. Zelson, Esquire #320699
100 Century Parkway, Suite 305
Mount Laurel, NJ 08054
(856)778-9700 (T)
(856)702-6640 (F)
ezelson@glzefflaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dr. Charity Welch
205 Norbury Circle CIVIL ACTION NO.:
Willow Street, PA 17584

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

v.

Millersville University
1 South George Street
Millersville, PA 17551
Defendant.

CIVIL ACTION

Plaintiff, Dr. Charity Welch, by and through her attorneys, brings this civil matter against
Defendant Millersville University alleging she was subjected to unlawful violations of Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”),
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) and 42 U.S.C. §1981, and avers and alleges
as follows:

THE PARTIES

1. The allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint are incorporated
by reference herein as if the same were set forth at length.
2. Plaintiff Dr. Charity Welch (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) is an African-American woman who
was born on May 7, 1953.
3. Plaintiff resides at the above-captioned address.

1
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 2 of 12

4. Defendant Millersville University (hereinafter “Defendant”) is a university with a location

at the above-captioned address.
5. Plaintiff was employed by Defendant and worked at the above-listed Millersville,
Pennsylvania address from July 2016 until her constructive termination on November 29,
2019.
6. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted by and through its agents, servants, and
employees, each of whom acted within the scope of his or her jobs responsibilities.

JURSIDICTION AND VENUE

7. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated by reference herein as if the same were set forth
at length.
8. The Court may properly maintain personal jurisdiction over Defendant because the
Defendant’s contacts with this state and this judicial district are sufficient for the exercise
of jurisdiction and comply with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice, thus
satisfying the standard set forth by the United States Supreme Court in International Shoe
Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) and its progeny.
9. The Court may exercise original subject-matter jurisdiction over the instant action pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(a)(4) because it arises under the laws of the United States
and seeks redress for violations of federal law.
10. The Court may also maintain supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims set forth
herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) and Rule 18(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure because they are sufficiently related to one or more claims within the Court’s
original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy.
11. Venue is properly laid in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
1391(b)(1) and 1391(b)(2) because the Defendant is located in this judicial district and
because all of the acts and/or omissions giving rise to the claims set forth herein occurred
in this judicial district.

2
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 3 of 12

EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

12. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated by reference herein as if the same were set forth
at length.
13. Plaintiff exhausted her administrative remedies under Title VII, the PHRA and the ADEA.
Butterbaugh v. Chertoff, 479 F. Supp. 2d 485 (W.D. Pa. 2007).
14. On or around February 25, 2019, Plaintiff filed a timely written Charge of Discrimination
(the “Charge”) against Defendant with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(“EEOC”) alleging retaliation as well as age, gender and race discrimination.
15. The charge was duly filed with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (“PHRC”).
16. Plaintiff received a Notice of Right to Sue relative to the Charge, by mail, on August 21,
2020.
17. Plaintiff files the instant Complaint within ninety (90) days of her receipt of the Notice of
Right to Sue letter relative the Charge.

FACTUAL SUMMARY

18. The allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint are incorporated
by reference herein as if the same were set forth at length.
19. Plaintiff began working for Defendant as an Assistant Dean in Defendant’s College of
Graduate Studies and Adult Learning (“CGSAL”) in or around July 2016.
20. Plaintiff was supervised by Victor DeSantis, who, from the start of Plaintiff’s
employment through August 2018, was Dean of CGSAL.
21. Plaintiff was qualified for her position and performed well.
22. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was the only African-American employee working
for Defendant’s College of Graduate Studies and Adult Learning.
23. Further, at all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was the oldest employee within her
department.
24. Beginning in June 2017, Plaintiff began to be harassed based on her race, gender and age.
25. This harassment was severe, and occurred frequently.
26. By way of example, in June of 2017, Plaintiff’s supervisor, Victor DeSantis, publicly
berated her in front of over a dozen employees, including multiple subordinates of

3
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 4 of 12

Plaintiff. By contrast, DeSantis spoke respectfully to Plaintiff’s younger, white

coworkers.
27. Additionally, DeSantis frequently left Plaintiff out of meetings and excluded her from
opportunities that would advance her career. DeSantis extended these opportunities to
Plaintiff’s younger white colleagues.
28. Soon thereafter, DeSantis attempted to interfere with Plaintiff hiring an African-
American student to assist her.
29. Plaintiff reasonably believed that the above-referenced incidents, as well as other
harassing incidents, represented discrimination on the bases of race, gender and age.
30. In February 2018, Plaintiff made a complaint of race and age discrimination to Vilas
Prabhu, Provost at Defendant.
31. Following this complaint of discrimination, the harassment of Plaintiff increased.
32. In August 2018, DeSantis was promoted. The promotion of DeSantis meant that Plaintiff
was the highest ranking, most qualified employee within CGSAL.
33. As a result, Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s coworkers assumed that, consistent with Defendant’s
past practices, Plaintiff would be promoted to the position of Interim Dean of CGSAL.
34. Instead, Defendant denied Plaintiff the promotion and instead appointed James Delle, a
white man who was significantly younger than Plaintiff.
35. At the time of his appointment, Delle had been employed by Defendant for only two (2)
months and had not worked within CGSAL.
36. Plaintiff was far more qualified for the position of Interim Dean of CGSAL than was
Delle.
37. Delle’s appointment to the position of Interim Dean of CGSAL meant that he would be
able to sit on the Dean’s Council, an important decision-making body within Defendant,
that, at the time of Delle’s appointment, did not include any African-American or
Hispanic decision-making members.
38. Further, Delle’s appointment to the position of Interim Dean of CGSAL meant that he
became Plaintiff’s supervisor.
39. Additionally, in August 2018, Plaintiff was demoted in that she was no longer to serve as
Acting Dean when the Dean was absent.

4
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 5 of 12

40. Following the August 2018 appointment of Delle and continuing through the end of
Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant, Plaintiff was continually left out of important
meetings and was not given relevant information.
41. Both DeSantis and Prabhu took steps to ensure that Plaintiff was not included in
important meetings and projects.
42. This interfered with Plaintiff’s ability to perform her job.
43. In February 2019, Delle was permanently appointed to the position of Dean of CGSAL.
44. Following this, Plaintiff continued to be harassed and excluded, which continued to
interfere with her ability to perform her job.
45. On November 29, 2019, Plaintiff was constructively discharged from employment with
Defendant.

COUNT I – RETALIATION
TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED
42. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
43. Plaintiff engaged in activity protected by Title VII.
44. Plaintiff complained of discrimination internally.
45. Thereafter, Defendant took adverse employment actions against Plaintiff, including, but not
limited to, denying her a promotion, demoting her and constructively terminating her.
46. There exists a causal connection between Plaintiff’s participation of the protected activity
and the adverse employment actions.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.
COUNT II- RETALIATION
THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
47. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
48. Plaintiff engaged in activity protected by the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.
49. Plaintiff complained of discrimination internally.
50. Thereafter, Defendant took adverse employment actions against Plaintiff, including, but not

5
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 6 of 12

limited to, denying her a promotion, demoting her and constructively terminating her.
51. There exists a causal connection between Plaintiff’s participation of the protected activity
and the adverse employment actions.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT III - RACE DISCRIMINATION – DISPARATE TREATMENT

TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED
52. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
53. Plaintiff is a member of protected classes in that she is African-American.
54. Plaintiff was qualified to perform the job for which she was hired.
55. Plaintiff suffered adverse job actions, including, but not limited to, denial of a promotion,
demotion and constructive termination.
56. Circumstances exist related to the above cited adverse employment actions that give rise to
an inference of discrimination.
57. Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff on the basis of race.
58. No legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons exist for the above cited adverse employment
actions that Plaintiff suffered.
59. The reasons cited by Defendant for the above cited adverse employment actions that Plaintiff
suffered are pretext for discrimination.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT IV – RACE DISCRIMINATION – DISPARATE TREATMENT

THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
60. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
61. The foregoing conduct by Defendants constitutes unlawful discrimination against Plaintiff on
the basis of her race.
62. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful race discrimination, Plaintiff has suffered damages as set
forth herein.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this

6
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 7 of 12

Complaint, infra.

COUNT V – RACE DISCRIMINATION – HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT

TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED
63. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
64. Defendant created a hostile work environment for Plaintiff on the basis of her race, as
described in preceding paragraphs.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT VI- RACE DISCRIMINATION- HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT

THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
65. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
66. Defendant created a hostile work environment for Plaintiff on the basis of her race, as
described in preceding paragraphs.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT VII—RACE DISCRIMINATION

42 U.S.C. § 1981
67. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
68. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff maintained or sought to maintain a contractual
relationship with Defendant.
69. At all times relevant herein, Defendant acted by and through its agents, servants, and
employees to intentionally discriminate against Plaintiff as a result of her race (African-
American) and thereby deny her the benefits of the contractual relationship she had entered or
sought to enter with Defendant.
70. Defendant’s discriminatory conduct included, but was not limited to, demoting Plaintiff,
denying Plaintiff a promotion and constructively terminating Plaintiff on the basis of her race.
71. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s unlawful actions.

7
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 8 of 12

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.
COUNT VIII—RETALIATION
42 U.S.C. § 1981
67. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
68. Plaintiff engaged in activity protected by 42 U.S.C. §1981.
69. Plaintiff complained of race discrimination internally.
70. Thereafter, Defendant took adverse employment actions against Plaintiff, including, but not
limited to, denying her a promotion, demoting her and constructively terminating her.
71. There exists a causal connection between Plaintiff’s participation of the protected activity
and the adverse employment actions.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT IX - AGE DISCRIMINATION – DISPARATE TREATMENT

THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT
72. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
73. Plaintiff is a member of protected classes in that she was, at all times relevant herein, older
than forty (40) years old.
74. Plaintiff was qualified to perform the job for which she was hired.
75. Plaintiff suffered adverse job actions, including, but not limited to, denial of a promotion,
demotion and constructive termination.
76. Circumstances exist related to the above cited adverse employment actions that give rise to
an inference of discrimination.
77. Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff on the basis of age.
78. No legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons exist for the above cited adverse employment
actions that Plaintiff suffered.
79. The reasons cited by Defendant for the above cited adverse employment actions that Plaintiff
suffered are pretext for discrimination.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this

8
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 9 of 12

Complaint, infra.

COUNT X – AGE DISCRIMINATION – DISPARATE TREATMENT

THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
80. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
81. The foregoing conduct by Defendants constitutes unlawful discrimination against Plaintiff on
the basis of her age.
82. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful age discrimination, Plaintiff has suffered damages as set
forth herein.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT XI – AGE DISCRIMINATION – HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT

THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT
83. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
84. Defendant created a hostile work environment for Plaintiff on the basis of her age, as
described in preceding paragraphs.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT XII- AGE DISCRIMINATION- HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT

THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
85. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
86. Defendant created a hostile work environment for Plaintiff on the basis of her age, as
described in preceding paragraphs.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT XIII - SEX DISCRIMINATION – DISPARATE TREATMENT

TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED
87. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if

9
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 10 of 12

the same were set forth more fully at length herein.

88. Plaintiff is a member of protected classes in that she is female.
89. Plaintiff was qualified to perform the job for which she was hired.
90. Plaintiff suffered adverse job actions, including, but not limited to, denial of a promotion,
demotion and constructive termination.
91. Circumstances exist related to the above cited adverse employment actions that give rise to
an inference of discrimination.
92. Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff on the basis of sex.
93. No legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons exist for the above cited adverse employment
actions that Plaintiff suffered.
94. The reasons cited by Defendant for the above cited adverse employment actions that Plaintiff
suffered are pretext for discrimination.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

COUNT XIV – GENDER DISCRIMINATION – DISPARATE TREATMENT

THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
60. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if
the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
61. The foregoing conduct by Defendants constitutes unlawful discrimination against Plaintiff on
the basis of her gender.
62. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful gender discrimination, Plaintiff has suffered damages as
set forth herein.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
Complaint, infra.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Dr. Charity Welch, requests that the Court grant her the
following relief against Defendant:
(a) Damages for past and future monetary losses as a result of Defendant’s unlawful
discrimination;

10
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 11 of 12

(b) Compensatory damages;

(c) Punitive damages;
(d) Liquidated damages;
(e) Emotional pain and suffering;
(f) Reasonable attorneys’ fees;
(g) Recoverable costs;
(h) Pre and post judgment interest;
(i) An allowance to compensate for negative tax consequences;
(j) A permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its directors, officers, employees,
agents, successors, heirs and assigns, and all persons in active concert or
participation with them, from engaging in, ratifying, or refusing to correct,
employment practices which discriminate in violation of TITLE VII, the PHRA ,
the ADEA and Section 1981.
(k) Order Defendant to remove and expunge, or to cause to be removed and expunged,
all negative, discriminatory, and/or defamatory memoranda and documentation
from Plaintiff’s record of employment, including, but not limited, the pre-textual
reasons cited for her adverse actions, disciplines, and termination; and
(l) Awarding extraordinary, equitable and/or injunctive relief as permitted by law,
equity and the federal statutory provisions sued hereunder, pursuant to Rules 64 and
65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

ZEFF LAW FIRM, LLC

_______________________
Gregg L. Zeff, Esquire
Eva C. Zelson, Esquire
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: October 6, 2020

11
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 12 of 12

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

Demand is hereby made for a trial by jury as to all issues.

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief the above matter in controversy is not

the subject of any other action pending in any court or of a pending arbitration proceeding, nor at

the present time any other action or arbitration proceeding contemplated.

ZEFF LAW FIRM, LLC

_____________________
Gregg L. Zeff, Esquire
Eva C. Zelson, Esquire
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: September 25, 2020

12
Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1-1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 1
 Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1-2 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CASE MANAGEMENT TRACK DESIGNATION FORM

Dr. Charity Welch : CIVIL ACTION

:
v. :
:
Millersville University : NO.

In accordance with the Civil Justice Expense and Delay Reduction Plan of this court, counsel for
plaintiff shall complete a Case Management Track Designation Form in all civil cases at the time of
filing the complaint and serve a copy on all defendants. (See § 1:03 of the plan set forth on the reverse
side of this form.) In the event that a defendant does not agree with the plaintiff regarding said
designation, that defendant shall, with its first appearance, submit to the clerk of court and serve on
the plaintiff and all other parties, a Case Management Track Designation Form specifying the track
to which that defendant believes the case should be assigned.

SELECT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT TRACKS:

(a) Habeas Corpus – Cases brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 through § 2255. ( )

(b) Social Security – Cases requesting review of a decision of the Secretary of Health
and Human Services denying plaintiff Social Security Benefits. ( )

(c) Arbitration – Cases required to be designated for arbitration under Local Civil Rule 53.2. ( )

(d) Asbestos – Cases involving claims for personal injury or property damage from
exposure to asbestos. ( )

(e) Special Management – Cases that do not fall into tracks (a) through (d) that are
commonly referred to as complex and that need special or intense management by
the court. (See reverse side of this form for a detailed explanation of special
management cases.) ( )

(f) Standard Management – Cases that do not fall into any one of the other tracks. ( x)

October 6, 2020 Gregg L. Zeff, Esq. Plaintiff

Date Attorney-at-law Attorney for
(856) 778-9700 (609) 534-0992 ezelson@glzefflaw.com

Telephone FAX Number E-Mail Address

(Civ. 660) 10/02

Case 5:20-cv-04942 Document 1-3 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 1