COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS HAMPDEN, SS ‘TRIAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH HAMPDEN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT C.A.No. HAMPDEN COUNTY ‘SUPERION DARRYL MOSS ) 22 0393 FILED ) ) JUL 12 2022 Plaintiff, ) ) po ne > CLERK OF COURTS v. ) Col /AINT AND JURY DEM. ) CITY OF SPRINGFIELD ) DOMENIC J. SARNO ) ) ) Defendants. ) Sa edadnsettnsstansns asses eeneeeeneeeeeneeseneeanuseozanO| INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT This is an action for damages and other relief arising out of the employment of Darryl Moss at City of Springfield. The claims include violations of M.G.L. Ch. 151B, defamation, negligence, breach of contract, retaliation and violation of freedom of speech. JURISDICTION 1. Plaintiff brings this action under applicable provisions of Massachusetts General Laws and the Massachusetts Constitution, Declaration of Rights. 2. Plaintiff, Darryl Moss, is @ resident of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and lives at 157 Jamaica Street, Springfield, MA 01119. He is Aftican-American, 3. Defendant, City of Springfield, is a municipal corporation with its principal place of business at 36 Court Street, Springfield, MA 01103.4, Defendant Domenic J. Samo is the Mayor of Springfield and at all times relevant hereto was acting within the scope of his employment. His principal place of business is at 36 Court Street, Springfield, MA 01103. 5, Defendant CITY OF SPRINGFIELD (“SPRINGFIELD”), through Mayor Domenic J. Samo (SARNO”) employed Plaintiff, 6. SARNO, hereinafter mentioned, has been employed as Mayor of City, and as agent of Springfield and is being sued in his official and personal capacities. EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES 7. On November 23, 2020, Plaintiff filed a timely written charge of discrimination with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (M.C.A.D.) against SPRINGFIELD, and ‘SARNO, alleging discrimination on the basis of race/color, gender and retaliation. Samg is also being sued under M.G.L. c. 151B, 8.4 (4A). PRESENTMENT 8, Plaintiff has performed all conditions precedent to recovery under M.G.L. 258. A. STATEMENT OF FACTS \ 9. On January 7, 2008, Plaintiff was hired by SPRINGFIELD as an administrative aide to the mayor at a salary of $45,084 per year. 10. On December 3, 2012, his annual salary was increased to $48,353.12. 11, On or about 2015, Plaintiff was promoted to Deputy Communications Director. 12, On December 20, 2019, Plaintiff was promoted to Director of Constituent Services. 13. He chaired the Mayor's City-Wide Violence Prevention Task Force. 14, He chaired the court-based Gang Intervention Task Force, 15. On or about January 7, 2020, Plaintiff began his role of Director of Constituent Services.16. On June 6, 2020 the Springfield Police Department leamed about the social media postings of Kashawn Haris, 17. On June 8, 2020 the Springfield Police Department revoked Harris’ license to carry a firearm. 18. On or about July 7, 2020, Plaintiff intervened on behalf of Kashawn Harris, an Aftican- ‘American man whose license to carry was revoked and several guns taken by the Springfield Police Department. 19, Harris was a local businessman who owned DJ Boogy Entertainment. 20. The Police Department took these actions against Harris because he posted observations on social media, 21. Mr. Harris posted that other communities were “tearing stuff up” and Springfield’s demonstrations had been too tame. 22. Asa result of this speech, the police department considered Mr. Harris a “public safety” threat: “Deputy Police Chief Steven Kent said Harris was an unsuitable person because of threats on social media.” 23. When Plaintiff found out about the revocation of the license to carry, he immediately met with SARNO and chief of staff to discuss the license revocation. 24, Plaintiff demanded that Mr. Harris’ guns and license to carry be returned. 25, At the time of the meeting with SARNO, Plaintiff was employed by City of Springfield as Director of Constituent Services. 26. Speaking in support of Harris was consistent with Moss’ duties as Director of Constituent Services.27. On or about September 1, 2020 Plaintiff applied for the position of Coordinator of Racial Equity and was told by SARNO that the position was his. 28, The new salary would have been $72,000. 29. On or about May 26, 2020, Plaintiff spoke out about the Black Lives Matter Movement, and police beatings of four black men in Springfield and throughout the United States. 30. On or about July 30, 2020, Police Commissioner Sherly Clapprood initiated an investigation into Plaintiff's social media postings. 31. SARNO informed Plaintiff of Commissioner Clapprood’s investigation in September, 2020. 32, SARNO took no corrective action even though he knew that the investigation was because Plaintiff objected to the five police officers being reinstated who beat the four black men. 33. On or about June 21, 2020, Springfield Police Detective Florissa Fuentes was fired for posting an image from a Black Lives Matter protest. 34. On September 5, 2020, Police Commissioner Clapprood was notified that Plaintiff made a social media posting that may have violated SPRINGFIELD’S social media policy. 35, On or about September 28, 2020, at an Investigatory Meeting, SPRINGFIELD alleged violations of the City’s social media policy. 36. Atan investigatory meeting, Plaintiff stated that he was afiaid for his son after Trump's defense of Kyle Rittenhouse’s deadly shootings. 37. Plaintiff had been vocal about police involved shootings in the Springfield area. 38. On or about Septer ber 30, 2020, Plaintiff spoke out at a public rally on public land against the City’s investigation of him and his postings. 39. SPRINGFIELD began its investigation of Plaintiff's social media posting after he opposed what he perceived to be discriminatory treatment of Mr. Harris.40. In the posting, written on August 26, 2020, Plaintiff was speaking about the white mob violence in Kenosha, Wisconsin that led to two people being Killed and a third injured. 41. President Trump expressed support for Kyle Rittenhouse, the young man who faced charges for the offenses. 42. Asa citizen, Plaintiff spoke out against President Trump’s apparent support for Rittenhouse. Plaintiff wrote: “This is equal to a declaration of war... but this is America! Sundown Sunrise {expletive} Country... Yo, Keshawn Dodds, grab the rifles.” 43, Plaintiff had been performing his job in a satisfactory manner. 44. PlaintifP's postings were done off-duty, and related to matters of public concern. 45, Plaintiff's postings were not prohibited by SPRINGFIELD’S policies. 46. No member of the public complained about Plaintiff's postings. 47. SPRINGFIELD presented no evidence to Plaintiff that the posting harmed the City in any manner, violated the social media policy or affected his job performance. 48. Plaintiff had no prior violations of any social media policies, or of any other city policies. 49. A white member of the fire department was allowed to retire when she violated the social media policy. 50, Plaintiff was not given the option to retire or to receive corrective counseling. 51. On October 1, 2020, SARNO terminated Plaintiff. 52, Talia Gee, Chief Diversity Officer, told Plaintiff that she had nothing to do with his termination. 53. Keshawn Dodd called Plaintiff's treatment a “public assassination.” 54, Mr, Dodds was the Executive Director of the Boys and Girls Club Family Center.55. SPRINGFIELD presented no evidence to Plaintiff that he made threatening remarks on or off the job. 56, SPRINGFIELD presented no evidence that Plaintiff lowered the image of the City in the estimation of the public. 57. Plaintiff has the full support of Springfield’s black community. 58. On September 30, 2020, Springfield City Counselor Tracye Whitfield spoke out on behalf of Plaintiff and said that the system in Springfield was not just or fair. 59, On or about January 15, 2020, Plaintiff was given the Springfield NAACP's Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Legacy Award, 60. Counselor Whitfield stated that the city was using Plaintiff's posting as an opportunity to direct attention away from the United States Department of Justice report that was issued in August, 2020 which accused the City’s narcotics unit of using excessive force and falsifying reports. 61. On October 3, 2020, City Councilor Tracye Whitfield said the firing of Moss was race discrimination. 62. She said there was disparate treatment; that a Springfield police officer in 2018 got a one day suspension and was later promoted to captain, even though he posted on Facebook. 63, Captain Richard Labelle was suspended for one day without pay on January 30, 2018 for commenting about NFL players kneeling for the National Anthem. 64. On September 30, 2020, Bishop Talbert Swan, President of the Greater Springfield NAACP spoke about abusive police tactics in the black community and called for the resignation of Police Commissioner Cheryl Clapprood.65, Bishop Swan said Plaintiff helped bridge the gap between the majority minority community and the police, 66. Waleska Lugo-DeJesus, Director of Springfield’s Healing Racism Institute of Pine Valley said Plaintiff was “...a person of integrity ... a person of honor.” 67. The City initiated investigations into postings of City Clerk Tasheena Davis (a black woman). 68. The City did not employ progressive discipline in actions against Plaintiff. 69. This was Plaintiff's first offense. 70. He was not given an oral warming, a written warning or suspension before termination. 71. Plaintiff was terminated on October 1, 2020, one day after he participated in a rally denouncing his mistreatment and that of other black City employees. 72. On October 2, 2020, Bishop Swan said the City failed to provide Plaintiff progressive discipline. 73. On or about August 21, 2021, Plaintiff orgonized the thirteenth annual Springfield Indie Soul Festival, which was held at Riverfront Park in Springfield. 74, Springfield police shut down the Festival, intimidated participants and threatened to tow cars. 75. The event was attended by primarily black people and other people of color. 76. Plaintiff had full permits for the event that was approved by every relevant department, including the Mayor’s office. 77. The police stated that they were looking for Plaintiff. 78. Plaintiff believed that they were going to arrest him in retaliation for him filing his MCAD complaint against SPRINGFIELD and SARNO.B. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS L RACE DISCRIMINATION (Termination) against SPRINGFIELD AND SARNO A. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-78 with the same force and effect as though set forth in full herein. B. Plaintiff was qualified for the position of Director of Constituent Services and performed his job at an acceptable level. C. Plaintiff was terminated on October 1, 2020 because of his race by SARNO. D. Plaintiff was replaced by someone outside his protected class, a Caucasian female. E. Asa direct and proximate result of the aforesaid race discrimination, Plaintiff has been damaged: sustained loss of earings, pension and fringe benefits. He has suffered mental and emotional distress, including anxiety for the future and his ability to support himself. He has suffered humiliation, embarrassment and loss of earning capacity, reputation and standing in the community, including the right to pursue gainful occupational choice. nL. RACE DISCRIMINATION (Disparate Treatment in Discipline) against SPRINGFIELD AND SARNO A. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1- 78 with the same force and effect as though set forth in full herein. B. Plaintiff was qualified for the position of Director of Constituent Services and performed his job in a satisfactory manner, C, Plaintiff was treated differently from white employees in disciplinary proceedings because of his race. D. White employees who worked for Springfield, and who made inappropriate social mediapostings were not terminated. E. No other white employees were investigated for posting on social media or because of association with community organizations. F. Asadirect and proximate result of the aforesaid race discrimination, Plaintiff has been damaged: sustained loss of earnings, pension and fringe benefits. He has suffered mental and emotional distress, including anxiety for the future and his ability to support himself. He has suffered humiliation, embarrassment and loss of earning capacity, reputation and standing in the community, including the right to pursue gainful occupational choice. Ill, RETALIATION against SPRINGFIELD and SARNO A. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-78 with the same force and effect as though set forth in full herein, B, Plaintiff complained in both written and oral communications to SPRINGFIELD and SARNO about discriminatory treatment of black residents and himself by Springfield police and other officials. C. Plaintiff's opposition to SPRINGFIELD’ failure to hire black, Latino and women workers ‘was a legally protected activity. D. The Defendants failed and refused to investigate these allegations, or remedy the discrimination. E. Defendant SPRINGFIELD and SARNO terminated Plaintiff because of his opposition to discriminatory hiring practices. F, Defendant SARNO recommended Plaintiff's termination. G. There is a causal connection between Plaintiff's opposition and Plaintiff's termination. H. Asa direct and proximate result of the aforesaid retaliation, plaintiff has been damaged: sustained loss of earnings, pension and fringe benefits. He has suffered mental and emotionaldistress, including anxiety for the future and his ability to support himself. He has suffered humiliation, embarrassment and loss of earning capacity, reputation and standing in the community, including the right to pursue gainful occupational choice. IV. NEGLIGENCE against SPRINGFIELD A. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-78 with the same force and effect as though set forth in full herein, B. SPRINGFIELD had a duty to reasonably investigate Plaintiff's social media postings. C. SPRINGFIELD breached this duty by failing to investigate the social media postings ina reasonable manner, i.e. within the context of a public debate over white racist violence against black people. D. Asa direct and proximate result of the aforesaid retaliation, plaintiff has been damaged: sustained loss of earnings, pension and fringe benefits. He has suffered mental and emotional distress, including anxiety for the future and his ability to support himself, He has suffered humiliation, embarrassment and loss of earning capacity, reputation and standing in the community, including the right to pursue gainful occupational choice. V. BREACH OF CONTRACT against SPRINGFIELD A. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-78 with the same force and effect as though set forth in full herein. B, In Springfield’s Human Resources Non-Bargaining Policy Manual, SPRINGFIELD promised that employees will be disciplined according to the policy of progressive discipline, C. Plaintiff was not afforded progressive discipline which is required under SPRINGFIELD's Human Resources Non-Bargaining Policy Manual, thereby breaching the terms of their employment contract with Plaintiff.D. By terminating without first providing Plaintiff an oral warming, a written warning or a suspension before termination, SPRINGFIELD breached this contract with Plaintiff. E. Asa direct and proximate result of the aforesaid breach of contract, Plaintiff has been damaged: sustained loss of earnings, pension and fringe benefits. He has suffered mental and emotional distress, including anxiety for the future and his ability to support himself. He has suffered humiliation, embarrassment and loss of earning capacity, reputation and standing in the community, including the right to pursue gainful occupational choice. VI. DEFAMATION against SARNO A. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-78 with the same force and effect as though set forth in full herein, B. SARNO, through his actions, inactions and statements said that Plaintiff had made discriminatory postings of such egregious nature to justify his immediate termination. C. SARNO stated to the media that Plaintiff's social media postings advocated violence. D. SARNO made statements about Plaintiff's social media postings to the general public that were untrue and demeaning to PlaintifPs character and reputation. E. These statements of violence were untrue and SARNO knew they were untrue and/or made the statements with reckless disregard of the truth, F. These acts and statements, which were defamatory, caused injury to Plaintiff's reputation by holding Plaintiff up to public scorn and ridicule and disparaged Plaintiff's good name and reputation. G. Asa direct and proximate result of the defamatory statements, Plaintiff has been damaged. He sustained loss of earnings, pension and fringe benefits. He has suffered mental and emotional distress, including anxiety for the future and his ability to support himself. He has sufferedhumiliation, embarrassment and loss of earning capacity, reputation and standing in the community, including the right to pursue gainful occupational choice. VII. VIOLATION OF FREE SPEECH, EXPRESSION AND ASSOCIATION Against SPRINGFIELD AND SARNO A. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-78 with the same force and effect as though set, forth in full herein. B. Under the Massachusetts Constitution, Declaration of Rights, Plaintiff is granted freedom of speech, expression and association. C. SPRINGFIELD and SARNO began an investigation of all of Plaintiff's social media postings because he posted a message on a matter of public concern. D. SPRINGFIELD and SARNO wrongfully terminated Plaintiff because of his speech, expression and association which were protected under Massachusetts Constitutional law. E. In Plaintiff's postings he was speaking on matters of public concern, F. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages and a preliminary and permanent injunction against ‘SPRINGFIELD and SARNO prohibiting the violation of Plaintiff's Constitutional rights to free speech, expression and association, G. Asa result thereof, Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer damage: loss of peace of mind, of income, loss of benefits, loss of personal and professional reputation, loss of professional opportunities and other losses including emotional distress and mental suffering. C. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court a) Enter a declaratory judgment that defendants’ acts, policies, practices and procedures complained of herein, jointly and severally, have violated and continue to violate the rights ofPlaintiff b.)_Eajoin Defendants from discriminating against Plaintiff on the basis of race and from violating Plaintif’s rights under Declaration of Rights of the Massachusetts Constitution, c.) Grant Plaintffjudgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, for back pay, front pay, reimbursement for loss of promotional opportunity, reimbursement for loss of experience in higher positions, reimbursement for loss of training opportunities and reimbursement for other lost benefits. 4.) Grant Plaintiff compensatory, including emotional distress damages against all defendants, jointly and severally. ¢) Grant Plaintiff punitive damages against all defendants, jointly and severally, as permitted under applicable law. £) Grant Plaintiff'such additional relief as the Court deems just and proper. g) _Avvard Plaintiff his eosts, interest and reasonable attorney's fees against all defendants, jointly and severally. Respectfully submitted, q gee DARRYL MOSS ' Byhis Attomey, Robgrt Johnson, Jr. BBO #253020 4238 Washington Street, #307 Boston, MA 02131 617-899-7871 Rejohnsoni 1 @Comeast.netVERIFICATION OF COMPLAINT I verify that I have read the allegations contained in this Complaint, that I have personal knowledge of the facts, and that the facts stated in the Complaint are true, except those facts alleged upon information and belief and, as to those facts, [believe they are true. Signed under the penalties of perjury this 15" day of June, 2022. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial forall issues that may be tried by jury. 6/15/22 lobert Johnson, Jr. Date Robert Johnson, Jr.