DC Civil Rights Complaint (DCHRA + Federal Counts)

CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT — DCHRA AND PARALLEL FEDERAL COUNTS — DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Introduction
3. Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue
4. Administrative Exhaustion / Election of Remedies
5. Factual Allegations
6. Count I — Discrimination in Violation of D.C. Code § 2-1402.11 (DCHRA — Employment)
7. Count II — Hostile Work Environment / Harassment in Violation of DCHRA
8. Count III — Retaliation in Violation of D.C. Code § 2-1402.61
9. Count IV — Aiding and Abetting in Violation of D.C. Code § 2-1402.62
10. Count V — Discrimination in Violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2
11. Count VI — Discrimination / Retaliation Under 42 U.S.C. § 1981
12. Count VII — Section 1983 Deprivation (Public Defendants Only)
13. Damages
14. Prayer for Relief
15. Demand for Trial by Jury
16. Reservation of Rights
17. Signature and Service Blocks
18. Verification
19. Certificate of Service
20. District of Columbia Practice Notes
21. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CIVIL DIVISION

CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. [________________________________]

VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
(Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation in Violation of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act and Federal Civil Rights Statutes)

2. INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action for compensatory damages, punitive damages, declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and costs arising from Defendants' unlawful discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against Plaintiff on the basis of Plaintiff's [PROTECTED CLASS(ES)] in violation of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act, D.C. Code § 2-1401.01 et seq. (the "DCHRA"), and parallel federal civil-rights statutes.

2. The DCHRA is one of the most expansive civil-rights statutes in the United States. It prohibits discrimination on the basis of nineteen-plus protected characteristics — including race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities, genetic information, disability, matriculation, political affiliation, status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual offense, or stalking, credit information, source of income, and homeless status — across the spheres of employment, housing, public accommodations, and educational institutions.

3. Plaintiff seeks full make-whole relief, including back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, uncapped punitive damages, equitable relief, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

3. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

4. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] ("Plaintiff") is, and at all relevant times was, a resident of [CITY, STATE], and at all relevant times was [an employee / a tenant / a customer / a student] of Defendant within the meaning of the DCHRA.

5. Plaintiff is a member of the following protected classes under D.C. Code § 2-1402.11: [LIST: e.g., race (Black/African-American), sex (female), disability, sexual orientation, religion (Muslim), family responsibilities, etc.].

6. Defendant [ENTITY NAME] ("Defendant Entity") is a [corporation / LLC / DC government agency / partnership] organized under the laws of [STATE] with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS], and is an "employer" within the meaning of D.C. Code § 2-1401.02(10) and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b).

7. Defendant [INDIVIDUAL NAME] ("Defendant Individual") is, on information and belief, a resident of [JURISDICTION] and at all relevant times was acting within the scope of employment by Defendant Entity and/or in their personal capacity as [POSITION / TITLE].

8. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the DCHRA claims pursuant to D.C. Code § 11-921 (general jurisdiction of the Superior Court) and § 2-1403.16. Subject-matter jurisdiction over the federal claims is concurrent in this Court and may be exercised pursuant to Yellow Freight System, Inc. v. Donnelly, 494 U.S. 820 (1990).

9. Venue is proper in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia because the unlawful discriminatory acts occurred in the District of Columbia and Defendant Entity transacts substantial business in the District. D.C. Code § 13-422.

4. ADMINISTRATIVE EXHAUSTION / ELECTION OF REMEDIES

10. On [DATE], Plaintiff timely filed a charge of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), Charge No. [________________________________], alleging the conduct described herein, within 300 days of the unlawful employment practice. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1).

11. [OPTION A — EEOC ONLY] Plaintiff did not file a separate charge with the DC Office of Human Rights ("OHR"). Plaintiff received a Notice of Right to Sue from the EEOC on [DATE], attached as Exhibit A, and files this Complaint within 90 days thereof.

12. [OPTION B — OHR DUAL-FILING] Plaintiff dual-filed the charge with the DC Office of Human Rights pursuant to the EEOC-OHR work-share agreement on [DATE], OHR Docket No. [________________________________]. On [DATE], OHR [administratively dismissed the charge for [REASON] / Plaintiff withdrew the charge consistent with D.C. Code § 2-1403.16(a) on or before the 30th day after the close of discovery], thereby preserving Plaintiff's right to bring this private action. See Brown v. Capitol Hill Club, 425 A.2d 1309 (D.C. 1981); Williams v. District of Columbia, 467 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2006).

13. Plaintiff's DCHRA claims are timely under D.C. Code § 2-1403.16(a), having accrued on [DATE] and tolled during the OHR pendency where applicable.

5. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

14. Plaintiff began [employment with / tenancy at / patronage of / enrollment in] Defendant Entity on [DATE] as a [POSITION / ROLE].

15. At all relevant times, Plaintiff performed Plaintiff's duties competently and met or exceeded Defendant's legitimate expectations.

16. Beginning on or about [DATE], Defendants subjected Plaintiff to a series of adverse actions because of Plaintiff's [PROTECTED CLASS], including:

• [Specific adverse action 1 — e.g., disparate discipline, denial of promotion, demotion];
• [Specific adverse action 2 — e.g., refusal of accommodation, harassment, slurs];
• [Specific adverse action 3 — e.g., termination, eviction, denial of service].

17. [Describe specific incidents with dates, witnesses, decisionmakers, and direct or circumstantial evidence of discriminatory animus, including any comparator evidence, statistical disparities, or pattern-and-practice evidence.]

18. [Describe protected activity if retaliation count is asserted: complaint to HR / EEOC charge / opposition to discrimination / participation in investigation, with date and recipient.]

19. [Describe the temporal and causal connection between protected activity and adverse action.]

20. Defendants' conduct was willful, malicious, and/or undertaken with reckless indifference to Plaintiff's federally and District-protected civil rights.

21. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has suffered lost wages, lost benefits, lost earning capacity, emotional distress, humiliation, anxiety, loss of professional reputation, and other compensatory injuries.

6. COUNT I — DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF D.C. CODE § 2-1402.11 (DCHRA — EMPLOYMENT)

22. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 21 as if fully set forth herein.

23. The DCHRA makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, in whole or in part, on the basis of any protected class enumerated in D.C. Code § 2-1402.11(a).

24. Plaintiff is a member of one or more protected classes under D.C. Code § 2-1402.11(a), specifically [CLASS(ES)].

25. Defendants discriminated against Plaintiff with respect to [hiring / discharge / compensation / terms / conditions / privileges] of employment because of Plaintiff's protected class, as alleged above.

26. Defendants' adverse actions were motivated, at least in part, by Plaintiff's protected class. See Furnco Constr. Corp. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567 (1978); Mitchell v. DCX, Inc., 274 F. Supp. 2d 33 (D.D.C. 2003) (DCHRA analyzed under burden-shifting framework).

27. Defendants' stated reasons for the adverse actions are pretextual.

28. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has suffered the damages set forth in Paragraphs 21 and 60 below.

7. COUNT II — HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT / HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF DCHRA

29. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 28.

30. The DCHRA, as amended by the 2022 Human Rights Enhancement Amendment Act, prohibits harassment that "unreasonably alters an individual's terms, conditions, or privileges of employment" or creates "an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment." D.C. Code § 2-1402.11(c-2).

31. The DCHRA's harassment standard is more plaintiff-friendly than federal law: harassment need not be "severe or pervasive" to be actionable; conduct that "unreasonably alters" the terms of employment is sufficient.

32. Plaintiff was subjected to unwelcome conduct based on Plaintiff's protected class, including [describe verbal, physical, visual, or other conduct, with frequency, severity, and identity of harassers].

33. The harassing conduct was sufficiently severe, pervasive, or otherwise unreasonable to alter the terms and conditions of Plaintiff's employment.

34. Defendant Entity is liable under principles of vicarious and direct liability and/or negligence in failing to prevent and remedy harassment after notice.

8. COUNT III — RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF D.C. CODE § 2-1402.61

35. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 34.

36. The DCHRA prohibits retaliation against any person who has "opposed any practice made unlawful by this chapter" or who has "made a charge, filed a complaint, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing." D.C. Code § 2-1402.61(a).

37. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by [describe — e.g., reporting discrimination internally on [DATE]; filing an OHR/EEOC charge on [DATE]; participating as a witness in a coworker's complaint].

38. Defendants knew of Plaintiff's protected activity.

39. After and because of Plaintiff's protected activity, Defendants subjected Plaintiff to materially adverse actions including [describe].

40. There is a causal nexus between Plaintiff's protected activity and the adverse actions, demonstrated by [temporal proximity, expressed animus, departure from policy, etc.].

9. COUNT IV — AIDING AND ABETTING IN VIOLATION OF D.C. CODE § 2-1402.62

41. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 40.

42. The DCHRA imposes individual liability on persons who "aid, abet, invite, compel, or coerce" violations of the chapter. D.C. Code § 2-1402.62.

43. Defendant Individual personally engaged in, encouraged, ratified, and/or compelled the unlawful discriminatory conduct alleged herein and is therefore individually liable.

10. COUNT V — DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2

44. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 43.

45. Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a).

46. Plaintiff is a member of one or more Title VII protected classes.

47. Defendant Entity is an "employer" within the meaning of Title VII (15 or more employees).

48. Defendant Entity's adverse actions against Plaintiff were motivated by Plaintiff's protected class, in violation of Title VII.

49. Plaintiff has exhausted administrative remedies as alleged in Paragraphs 10–13.

11. COUNT VI — DISCRIMINATION / RETALIATION UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1981

50. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 49.

51. Section 1981 guarantees all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States the same right to make and enforce contracts as is enjoyed by white citizens, and prohibits race-based discrimination and retaliation in contractual relationships, including employment. Domino's Pizza, Inc. v. McDonald, 546 U.S. 470 (2006); CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, 553 U.S. 442 (2008).

52. Defendants intentionally discriminated and/or retaliated against Plaintiff in the making, performance, modification, and termination of Plaintiff's employment contract because of Plaintiff's race.

53. Section 1981 does not require administrative exhaustion and is governed by a four-year statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. § 1658.

12. COUNT VII — SECTION 1983 DEPRIVATION (PUBLIC DEFENDANTS ONLY)

54. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 53.

55. At all relevant times, Defendant [DC AGENCY / OFFICIAL] acted under color of District of Columbia law within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

56. Defendants' conduct deprived Plaintiff of rights secured by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fifth Amendment, made applicable to the District of Columbia through Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954).

57. The deprivation was caused by an official policy, custom, or practice of Defendant [ENTITY], or by deliberate indifference of policymakers, satisfying Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).

13. DAMAGES

58. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer:

• Economic Damages: lost wages, lost benefits (including health insurance, retirement contributions, and equity), lost bonuses, lost tips/commissions, diminished earning capacity, and out-of-pocket expenses.
• Non-Economic Damages: emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, anxiety, depression, loss of enjoyment of life, damage to professional reputation, and loss of consortium where applicable.
• Punitive Damages: Defendants' conduct was willful, malicious, and undertaken with reckless indifference to Plaintiff's civil rights, warranting punitive damages under D.C. Code § 2-1403.13(a)(1)(E), 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(1), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

59. The DCHRA imposes no statutory cap on compensatory or punitive damages. Title VII compensatory and punitive damages are subject to the tiered cap in 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(3) (ranging from $50,000 to $300,000 based on employer size); accordingly, DCHRA damages may exceed Title VII damages, and Plaintiff seeks the maximum available under each statute.

60. Plaintiff seeks reasonable attorney's fees, costs, and expert fees under D.C. Code § 2-1403.13(e), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k), 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and applicable fee-shifting provisions.

14. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court enter judgment in Plaintiff's favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally, for the following relief:

• A. A declaratory judgment that Defendants' conduct violates the DCHRA, Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and any other applicable federal civil-rights statute;
• B. Permanent injunctive relief enjoining Defendants from further discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, and requiring affirmative remedial measures including training, policy revision, and posting of the rights guaranteed by the DCHRA;
• C. Reinstatement to Plaintiff's position with full seniority and benefits, or front pay in lieu thereof;
• D. Back pay, including lost wages, bonuses, commissions, and the value of all lost employment benefits, with prejudgment interest;
• E. Compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial, with no statutory cap under the DCHRA;
• F. Punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish and deter, with no statutory cap under the DCHRA;
• G. Reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and costs;
• H. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
• I. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

15. DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all claims and issues so triable as a matter of right pursuant to Super. Ct. Civ. R. 38, the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(c), and any other applicable provision of law.

16. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this Complaint to assert additional claims or add additional parties as discovery may reveal, including but not limited to claims under D.C. Code §§ 2-1402.21 (housing), 2-1402.31 (public accommodations), 2-1402.41 (education), the Family and Medical Leave Act, the District of Columbia Family and Medical Leave Act, the Wage Payment and Collection Law, and common-law tort theories.

17. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Date: [DATE]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], D.C. Bar No. [####]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER]

Email: [EMAIL]

18. VERIFICATION

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ss:

I, [PLAINTIFF NAME], being first duly sworn, depose and state that I am the Plaintiff in the foregoing action; that I have read the foregoing Verified Complaint and know the contents thereof; and that the factual allegations therein are true to my own knowledge except as to those matters alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true.

[________________________________]

[PLAINTIFF NAME]

Subscribed and sworn to before me this [____] day of [_______________], 20[____].

[________________________________]

Notary Public, District of Columbia

(My Commission Expires: [_______________])

19. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this the [____] day of [_______________], 20[____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing VERIFIED COMPLAINT was served upon Defendants via [hand delivery / certified mail, return receipt requested / private process server / authorized e-filing system] at the following addresses:

[SERVICE LIST WITH ADDRESSES OF EACH DEFENDANT AND COUNSEL OF RECORD]

[________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME]

20. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PRACTICE NOTES

• Breadth of protected classes. The DCHRA is one of the most expansive anti-discrimination statutes in the country. In addition to the federally protected classes, it protects: marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities, genetic information, matriculation, political affiliation, source of income, status as a victim of domestic violence/sexual offense/stalking, credit information, and homeless status. Several of these (personal appearance, political affiliation, matriculation, source of income, family responsibilities) have no direct federal analog and present unique pleading opportunities.
• Uncapped damages. Unlike Title VII (capped at $300,000 for the largest employers under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(3)), the DCHRA imposes no statutory cap on compensatory or punitive damages. See Daka, Inc. v. Breiner, 711 A.2d 86 (D.C. 1998).
• Individual liability. D.C. Code § 2-1402.62 imposes personal liability on individuals who aid, abet, invite, compel, or coerce DCHRA violations — a powerful tool unavailable under Title VII.
• Election of remedies (CRITICAL). Filing an OHR charge generally bars a subsequent Superior Court action on the same conduct unless OHR administratively dismisses or the complainant timely withdraws under § 2-1403.16(a). EEOC-only filings via the work-share agreement do not trigger the election bar so long as OHR did not docket the matter substantively. Brown v. Capitol Hill Club, 425 A.2d 1309 (D.C. 1981).
• Statute of limitations. Two (2) years for a private DCHRA action under § 2-1403.16(a); tolled during OHR pendency. Title VII: 90 days from EEOC right-to-sue. § 1981: 4 years (28 U.S.C. § 1658). § 1983: 3 years (DC personal-injury SOL via Carney v. American University, 151 F.3d 1090 (D.C. Cir. 1998)).
• Harassment standard. Effective October 1, 2022, the DCHRA's harassment standard is more permissive than Title VII's "severe or pervasive" test; conduct that "unreasonably alters" terms and conditions is actionable. D.C. Code § 2-1402.11(c-2).
• Forum. DC Superior Court has general jurisdiction; U.S. District Court for D.D.C. has federal-question jurisdiction with supplemental DCHRA jurisdiction. Title VII's nationwide venue under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) frequently lays venue in D.D.C.
• DC-government defendants. No Eleventh Amendment immunity (DC is not a state). DC is a "person" under § 1983; Monell policy/custom analysis applies. Notice-of-claim under D.C. Code § 12-309 is not required for civil-rights statutory claims but may be required for parallel common-law tort counts.
• Mandatory mediation at OHR. Under D.C. Code § 2-1403.04(d), all OHR complaints are referred to mediation before investigation. Parties have 45 days to mediate; if unsuccessful, full investigation begins.
• Recent amendments. The Human Rights Enhancement Amendment Act of 2022 added homeless status as a protected class and codified an expanded harassment definition. The Fairness in Human Rights Administration Amendment Act of 2024 expanded compensatory and punitive damages and attorney's fees in administrative proceedings against the DC government.

21. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• D.C. Code § 2-1402.11 (Employment) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.11
• D.C. Code § 2-1402.21 (Housing) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.21
• D.C. Code § 2-1402.31 (Public accommodations) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.31
• D.C. Code § 2-1402.41 (Educational institutions) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.41
• D.C. Code § 2-1402.61 (Retaliation) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.61
• D.C. Code § 2-1402.62 (Aiding and abetting) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.62
• D.C. Code § 2-1403.04 (OHR complaint filing) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1403.04
• D.C. Code § 2-1403.13 (Remedies) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1403.13
• D.C. Code § 2-1403.16 (Private cause of action) — https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1403.16
• DC Office of Human Rights — https://ohr.dc.gov/
• DC Commission on Human Rights Litigation Manual — https://ohr.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ohr/publication/attachments/Commission%20Litigation%20Manual_0.pdf
• Brown v. Capitol Hill Club, 425 A.2d 1309 (D.C. 1981) (election of remedies)
• Daka, Inc. v. Breiner, 711 A.2d 86 (D.C. 1998) (DCHRA damages)
• Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954) (Fifth Amendment equal protection in DC)
• Owens v. District of Columbia, 631 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2009) (DC § 1983 liability)
• 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (Title VII) — https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964
• 42 U.S.C. § 1981 — https://www.govinfo.gov/
• 42 U.S.C. § 1983 — https://www.govinfo.gov/
• DC Superior Court Civil Rules — https://www.dccourts.gov/sites/default/files/divisionspdfs/CivilRules.pdf

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in the District of Columbia must review and customize this document before filing. Statutes, citations, OHR procedures, and DC Superior Court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.