Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION THALIA VOUCHIDES Plaintiff, JANIS THOMPSON Intervenor, vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:10-CV-02559 HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM; COLLEEN ADAMS INDIVIDUALLY and IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS POLICE OFFICER FOR HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM Defendants. INTERVENOR S FIRST AMENDED PLEA OF INTERVENTION COMES NOW, Intervenor Janis Thompson, by and through counsel, and in support of her claims against Defendant Houston Community College System and Colleen Adams, Individually and in her Official Capacity as Police Officer for Houston Community College System, and would respectfully show as follows: I. PARTIES 1. Plaintiff, Thalia Vouchides, is of Indian decent and is a resident of Katy, Harris County, Texas. 2. Intervenor, Janis Thompson is an African American and is a resident of Katy, Harris County, Texas. Page 1
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 2 of 18 2. Defendant, Houston Community College System, is a community college, and has appeared in this case through their respective attorneys of record. 3. Defendant, Colleen Adams, is a police officer with Houston Community College System and a resident and citizen of the United States of America, who has appeared in this case through her respective attorney of record. II. JURISDICTION & VENUE 4. The Complaint presents federal questions pursuant to the United States Constitution, including provisions of the First, Fourth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution which are asserted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. 5. In addition, the Complaint presents federal questions pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including 42 U.S.C. 2000d 2000d-7 pertaining to federally assisted programs. 6. Moreover, the Complaint presents federal questions pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1981. this Court. 7. The damages claimed are within the jurisdictional requirements of 8. All conditions precedent to bring these actions have occurred and/or been performed. 9. Venue is proper in the Houston Division of the Southern District of Texas since Intervenor s claims, including asserted federal claims, accrued in Page 2
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 3 of 18 Harris County, Texas and/or one or more of the Defendants reside in Harris County, Texas and/or is principally located in Harris County, Texas. III. FACTS 10. On or about February 9, 2010, Janis Thompson, an enrolled student at the Houston Community College System s Katy Campus, was unlawfully detained and interrogated by Colleen Adams, a police officer under the employ, direction, control and/or supervision of the Houston Community College System. 11. Complaints have been made about Officer Adams conduct since 2003 as Houston Community College administrators found that Officer Adams had a history of bad conduct dating back to 2003. 12. In 2004, Officer Adams was admonished by her superiors after receiving three complaints in 2004 regarding Officer Adams temperament for going off on people. 13. Houston Community College receives federal financial assistance. 14. Ms. Thompson has taken advantage of those programs by applying and receiving federally funded assistance to pay for school. 15. Ms. Thompson is of African American decent. 16. On February 9, 2010, Janis Thompson reported to the Houston Community College System police department that gas had been stolen out of her truck. Page 3
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 4 of 18 17. Subsequently, Ms. Thompson received a text message from her classmate Thalia Vouchides, requesting Ms. Thompson to meet her at the security office at Houston Community College System. 18. Upon arrival, Officer Colleen Adams asked Ms. Thompson if she reported that gas was missing out of her truck. Ms. Thompson responded, Yes. 19. Officer Adams responded, That doesn t happen on this campus so that s not true. 20. Officer Adams instructed Ms. Thompson to enter a small room. 21. Ms. Thompson entered the room with Thalia Vouchides, who was accused of making a terroristic threat by Officer Adams. 22. Officer Adams instructed Ms. Thompson to write a statement regarding the incident she reported earlier pertaining to her truck. 23. Officer Adams also demanded several times in a threatening manner that Ms. Thompson write down what Thalia Vouchides stated in an earlier conversation. 24. Ms. Vouchides asked Officer Colleen Adams why she was being singled out. 25. Officer Adams told Ms. Vouchides, Because you look like a terrorist. 26. Officer Adams demanded that Ms. Vouchides tell her why she spoke with an accent. Page 4
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 5 of 18 27. After receiving Ms. Vouchides Green Card, Officer Adams left Ms. Thompson and Ms. Vouchides, locked inside a small office. 28. Ms. Thompson and Thalia Vouchides remained locked in the room against their will for approximately one (1) hour. 29. Officer Adams then released Ms. Thompson and Ms. Vouchides. 30. After Ms. Thompson submitted a written complaint to the Houston Community College System police department, as well as Houston Community College System personnel that she was subjected to harassment and retaliation. 31. Officer Adams followed Ms. Thompson at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 32. Officer Adams forcibly bumped into Ms. Thompson at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 33. Officer Adams forcibly brushed by Ms. Thompson at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 34. Officer Adams repeatedly used her uniformed presence to visually intimidate and harass Ms. Thompson at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 35. Houston Community College System did nothing to prevent the intimidation and harassment to which Ms. Thompson was being subjected. 36. On or about March 25, 2010, after Houston Community College System Cosmetology instructors used an overhead classroom projector to play for students a television news clip regarding the incident involving Officer Page 5
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 6 of 18 Adams, Janis Thompson and Thalia Vouchides, Ms. Thompson was approached by several students who made spiteful comments such as why don t you go back to Africa. 37. Houston Community College System failed to prevent the abusive behavior. 38. Houston Community College administrators instructed Ms. Thompson and Ms. Vouchides not to attend classes for fear that Ms. Thompson and Ms. Vouchides could be harmed or harassed by staff members and/or other students. 39. Ms. Thompson was prevented from attending and participating in class lectures. 40. As a consequence, Ms. Thompson was instructed to take her final exams without hearing and participating in the class lectures as other students. 41. Ms. Thompson was informed that she could simply receive an incomplete grade for the classes where she was prevented from attending. (See attached emails dated 4/9/10 and 5/12/10). 42. Houston Community College has been on notice since 2003 about Officer Adams overly aggressive negative attitude towards students, staff and co-workers. 43. Officer Adams attitude has been documented by her peers who assert that she presents a damaging effect on all Officers. (See attached Page 6
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 7 of 18 Exhibit, July 2009 Letter Conduct Unbecoming an Officer signed by ten officers). 44. Houston Community College System encouraged and aided the harassment, subjecting Ms. Thompson to dehumanizing misconduct resulting from false accusations and its own failure to properly and promptly take adequate remedial action. 45. As a result, Ms. Thompson suffered injuries and damages. IV. JANIS THOMPSON DID NOTHING WRONG 46. Intervenor would next show that nothing she did or failed to do in any way contributed to the incidents made the basis of this lawsuit. Consequently, there is no fault which may be assigned to Intervenor. V. VICARIOUS LIABILITY 47. Intervenor was subjected to the harassing, discriminatory, retaliatory and unlawful practices of Houston Community College System during her enrollment and matriculation as a student at the Houston Community College System. Consequently, Intervenor asserts respondeat superior, agency, vicarious liability and/or ratification, stating that whenever in this complaint it is alleged HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM did any act or thing it is meant that HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM S agents, supervisors, employees, servants, management, officers, vice principals and representatives did such act and/or at the time said act was done, the act was done with the full authorization or acquiescence of HOUSTON Page 7
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 8 of 18 COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM or was done in the normal and routine course and scope of employment of HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM. VI. TITLE VI DISCRIMINATION 48. Intervenor repeats and re-alleges by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 10 through 47 and incorporates same as though fully copied and set for the at length herein. 49. Intervenor would show that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq., 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, prohibits discrimination based on race and color in federally assisted programs. See also, Diverges v. Mason & Hanger-Silas Mason Co., Inc., 911 F.2d 1377, 1383-84 (10 th Cir. 1990). 50. HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM accepts grants of federal financial assistance and is subject to the restrictions of Title VI. Houston Community College System hired, trained, controlled and supervised Officer Colleen Adams. Houston Community College System and Officer Colleen Adams discriminated against Intervenor. Officer Colleen Adams actions and conduct was motivated based on Intervenor s race, African American. 51. Intervenor was interrogated, falsely imprisoned and harassed during school hours when Intervenor had done nothing wrong. Thereafter, Page 8
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 9 of 18 Officer Colleen Adams followed Intervenor around campus where Officer Colleen Adams intimidated, harassed and assaulted Intervenor. A. Title VI Race Discrimination 52. Defendants intentionally engaged in unlawful practices involving Intervenor because of her race. 53. Intervenor was prevented from attending and participating in class lectures. Intervenor was instructed to take her final exams without hearing and participating in the class lectures as other students. Intervenor was informed that she could simply receive an incomplete grade for the classes where she was prevented from attending for safety purposes. (See attached emails dated 4/9/10 and 5/12/10). Consequently, Intervenor was instructed to take the final exams off campus. 54. Defendants intentionally discriminated against Intervenor, in connection with her education by depriving and/or excluding her of the benefits of and participation in activities available to other students, because of her race. 55. Defendants intentionally discriminated against Intervenor by subjecting her to discrimination based on her race. 56. Defendants unlawful discrimination based on Intervenor s race occurred under program(s) or activity(ies) receiving federal assistance. 57. Defendants unlawful discrimination based on Intervenor s race was carried out with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Intervenor. Page 9
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 10 of 18 58. As a consequence of Defendants unlawful conduct, Intervenor suffered injuries and damages. B. Title VI Color Discrimination 59. Defendants intentionally engaged in unlawful practices involving Intervenor because of her color. 60. Defendants had no probable cause for detaining Intervenor. 61. Defendants intentionally discriminated against Intervenor in connection with her education by depriving and/or excluding her of the benefits of and participation in activities available to other students, because of her color. 62. Defendants intentionally discriminated against Intervenor by subjecting her to discrimination based on her color. 63. Defendants unlawful discrimination based on Intervenor s color occurred under program(s) or activity(ies) receiving federal assistance. 64. Defendants unlawful discrimination based on Intervenor s color was carried out with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Intervenor. 65. As a consequence of Defendants unlawful conduct, Intervenor suffered injuries and damages. VII. TITLE VI RETALIATION 66. Intervenor repeats and re-alleges by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 10 through 65 and incorporates same as though fully copied and set forth at length herein. Page 10
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 11 of 18 67. Officer Colleen Adams followed Intervenor at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 68. Officer Colleen Adams forcibly bumped into Intervenor at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 69. Officer Colleen Adams forcibly brushed by Intervenor at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 70. Officer Colleen Adams repeatedly used her uniformed presence to visually intimidate and harass Intervenor at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 71. Defendants intentionally retaliated against Intervenor for exercising her federally protected rights under Title VI. 72. Defendants retaliated against Intervenor and subjected her to further discriminatory and harassing conduct as a result of her complaining about and opposing the unlawful conduct of Defendants. 73. Retaliating against a person complaining about or opposing discriminatory practices prohibited by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq., and 601, as amended, is a violation of federal law. 74. After complaining to Defendants of maltreatment and unlawful discriminatory practices, Intervenor was subjected to unlawful retaliation, including disparate treatment, assault, verbal abuse, denial of benefits, and/or Page 11
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 12 of 18 interference with her education, as well as false accusations, because of her lawful complaints. 75. Defendants unlawful retaliation was carried out with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Intervenor. 76. As a consequence of Defendants retaliatory conduct, Intervenor suffered injuries and damages. VIII. 42 U.S.C 1981 DISCRIMINATION 77. Intervenor repeats and re-alleges by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 10 through 76 and incorporates same as though fully copied and set forth at length herein. 78. Intervenor would show that Defendants denied Intervenor the enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms and conditions of a contractual relationship as is enjoyed by white citizens of the United States in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1981. 79. Intervenor was enrolled as a student at the Houston Community College System s Katy Campus. Intervenor was instructed not to attend classes, thus preventing her from participating and hearing class lectures. Intervenor filed her complaint with the school and weeks later, Officer Colleen Adams retaliated against Intervenor by following her on campus harassing and assaulting Intervenor. 80. Intervenor was unreasonably detained, interrogated, and/or investigated for unreasonable amounts of time and/or without a probable cause by Defendants. Page 12
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 13 of 18 Intervenor. 81. White students and/or enrollees were not treated the same as 82. Consequently, Defendants imposed additional conditions on Intervenor which adversely affected Intervenor s ability to attend school. 83. As a consequence of Defendants unlawful conduct, Intervenor suffered injuries and damages. IX. 42 U.S.C. 1983 VIOLATIONS 84. Intervenor repeats and re-alleges by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 10 through 83 and incorporates same as though fully copied and set forth at length herein. 85. Houston Community College System had knowledge of Officer Adams history of bad conduct and overly aggressive temperament dating back to 2003. 86. In 2004, Officer Adams was admonished by her superiors after receiving three complaints in 2004 regarding Officer Adams temperament for going off on people. 87. Nevertheless, Officer Adams repeatedly used her uniformed presence to visually intimidate and harass Intervenor at the Houston Community College System Katy Campus during school operation hours. 88. On February 9, 2010, Intervenor was unlawfully detained and interrogated by Officer Adams who was under the employment, direction and/or control of Houston Community College System. Intervenor was taken into a room interrogated and locked in the room for over an hour. Even though Page 13
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 14 of 18 Intervenor filed a complaint with the Houston Community College System, weeks after this incident, Officer Adams harassed and assaulted Intervenor while Intervenor was on Houston Community College s campus attending classes. 89. Intervenor would show that 42 U.S.C. 1983 provides remedies and redress to citizens deprived of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the United States Constitution. 90. Defendants violated rights, privileges or immunities secured by the United States Constitution. 91. Intervenor therefore seeks remedies and redress against Defendants for deprivation of rights secured by the United State Constitution. 92. A system, practice, procedure and/or policy of HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM caused and/or contributed to the injuries and damages complained of herein by Intervenor. 93. Personnel, including Officer Colleen Adams, were taught and/or allowed to believe that their acts and/or omissions were acceptable even though the acts and/or omissions violated due process, free speech and constitutional standards. 94. Conduct which, when viewed objectively, would be seen as unreasonable was permitted, ratified and/or allowed by policy makers at HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM. Page 14
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 15 of 18 95. COLLEEN ADAMS a police officer employed by HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM, was involved in the incidents made the basis of this lawsuit. 96. COLLEEN ADAMS, while acting under the color of state law, as authorized, permitted, allowed and/or ratified by HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM, deprived Intervenor of constitutional rights secured by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. 97. HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM, including, more specifically, its employee(s), servant(s) and agent(s), wrongly stopped, interrogated, searched and assaulted Intervenor, under color of state law, and deprived Intervenor of rights protected by the United States Constitution. 98. HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM, including, more specifically, its employee(s), servant(s) and agent(s), falsely accused, imprisoned and harassed Intervenor, under color of state law, and deprived Intervenor of rights protected by the United States Constitution. 99. Policy, procedure, practice, custom, habit, training, supervision and disciplinary irregularities and/or failures of HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM with respect to its employees, servants and agents, including, but not limited to, COLLEEN ADAMS, were of such a persistent and continuously rooted nature that they were in fact the operative policies of HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM. Page 15
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 16 of 18 100. Defendants intentionally discriminated against Intervenor because of her race including unlawfully stopping, detaining, harassing and/or assaulting Intervenor. 101. Defendants misconduct and constitutional violations were a motivating force behind the incidents in question. 102. Defendants misconduct was undertaken with malice or reckless in difference to the federally protected rights of Intervenor. 103. As a consequence of Defendants misconduct, Intervenor suffered injuries and damages. X. PRAYER 104. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Intervenor respectfully requests this Honorable Court to: A. Declare that the practices described in this complaint exist at HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM and that they are unlawful; B. Issue a permanent injunction prohibiting the Defendant, its officers, agents, employees and successors, from engaging in the discriminatory employment practices complained of herein; C. Issue a permanent mandatory injunction requiring that Defendant adopt employment practices in conformity with the requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and/or Title VI; D. Award compensatory damages, as well as damages for past and future mental anguish, suffering, anxiety, stress, humiliation, ability to enjoy life and medical care and treatment appropriate to the proof at trial; E. Award punitive damages appropriate to the proof at trial; F. Award costs of court and out of pocket expenses; Page 16
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 17 of 18 G. Award expert witness fees and costs; H. Award reasonable attorney fees, including conditional awards in the event of appeal; I. Award pre-judgment and post-judgment interest paid at the highest rate permitted by law; and/or, J. Award such other and further relief at law or in equity, general or special, to which the Intervenor may show herself to be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, D.G. PARKER LAW FIRM, PLLC By: /s/ Derrick G. Parker Derrick G. Parker Southern District Bar No. 675130 State Bar No. 24044928 1314 Texas Avenue, Suite 1416 Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 821-9433 Telephone (713) 821-9432 Facsimile derrick@dgparkerlaw.com ATTORNEY FOR INTERVENOR CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been forwarded by court electronic filing service to the following on this the 7th of February, 2011. Mickey Washington Cletus Ernster Washington & Ernster, PLLC 1314 Texas Avenue, Suite 1416 Houston, Texas 77002 Maja Scott 1795 N. Fry Road, Suite 313 Katy, Texas 77449 Page 17
Case 4:10-cv-02559 Document 33 Filed in TXSD on 02/07/11 Page 18 of 18 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Jana H. Woelfel Strasburger & Price, LLP 1401 McKinney Street, Suite 2200 Houston, Texas 77010-4035 Monica Alvarez Velazquez Strasburger & Price, LLP 2801 Network Boulevard, Suite 600 Frisco, Texas 75034-1872 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE Gregory Cagle 215 E. Galveston Street League City, Texas 77573 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT COLLEEN ADAMS /s/ Derrick G. Parker Derrick G. Parker Page 18