Ethnic Epithets Supported Pretext Claim Barring Summary Judgment for Municipality By Jerry L. Pigsley, Harding & Shultz, P.C., L.L.O. A police officer, a native of Poland, sued the City of Englewood, Colorado, and his supervisors in the police department and a deputy in the sheriff’s office after he was fired from employment. Zasada v. City of Englewood, Case No. 11-CV-02834 (D. Colo. Sept. 30, 2013). The police officer was fired by the police chief after an investigation concluded he was guilty of insubordination, conduct unbecoming an officer, and untruthfulness. The police sergeant who conducted the investigation in his report concluded that the officer had violated the City’s harassment reporting policy which prohibited sexually implicit or explicit communications. The report was reviewed by three deputy chiefs who each recommended to the police chief he be terminated. Based on the investigation file and report, as well as his command staff recommendation, the chief terminated the officer’s employment. Filed Charge The officer then filed a charge with the EEOC and after the investigation received a right to sue letter from the EEOC,
26
and then sued the City, the police chief, the sergeant who did the investigation, and a county sheriff’s deputy for national origin discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation of Title VII, and a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of his right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Officer’s Claims The officer claimed the City’s proffered reasons for its employment decision were false because the chief relied upon biased recommendations. A county sheriff’s deputy who was critical of the officer had called him a “Polack” after the officer when asked where he was from said Poland. The officer claimed this deputy, who became the commander of a cooperative task force of numerous law enforcement agencies throughout the Denver metro area, in which he was assigned, continued to make comments and jokes about “Polacks” in his presence. The court in denying the City’s motion for summary judgment found a reasonable jury could conclude the chief relied on biased recommendations and that was the cause for his termination. The officer asserted a “cat’s paw” or “rubber
SOUTH DAKOTA MUNICIPALITIES
