Oklahoma State Civil Rights Complaint (OADA)

OKLAHOMA STATE CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT — OKLAHOMA ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Introduction and Nature of the Action
3. Parties
4. Jurisdiction and Venue
5. Administrative Exhaustion
6. Factual Allegations
7. Count I — Discrimination in Violation of the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act, 25 O.S. §§ 1302, 1350
8. Count II — Retaliation in Violation of the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act, 25 O.S. § 1302
9. Count III — Parallel Federal Claim (Title VII / § 1981 / ADEA / ADA)
10. Damages
11. Prayer for Relief
12. Demand for Trial by Jury
13. Reservation of Rights
14. Signature and Service Blocks
15. Verification
16. Certificate of Service
17. Oklahoma Practice Notes
18. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF [COUNTY] COUNTY

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

CASE NO. [________________________________]

VERIFIED PETITION (EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION — OADA)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, brings this action against Defendant for violations of the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act and parallel federal civil rights statutes, and alleges as follows:

2. INTRODUCTION AND NATURE OF THE ACTION

2.1. This is a civil action brought under the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act, Okla. Stat. tit. 25, §§ 1101 et seq. (the "OADA"), for unlawful employment discrimination, harassment, and retaliation on the basis of Plaintiff's [protected class — race / color / religion / sex (including pregnancy) / national origin / age / disability / genetic information].

2.2. Plaintiff also asserts parallel federal claims under [Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. / 42 U.S.C. § 1981 / the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. / the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.] to recover compensatory and punitive damages not available under the OADA.

2.3. Plaintiff has exhausted all administrative prerequisites by timely filing a Charge of Discrimination with the Oklahoma Attorney General's Office of Civil Rights Enforcement ("OCRE") and/or the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), and has received a Notice of Right to Sue. This action is filed within ninety (90) days of receipt of that Notice. See 25 O.S. § 1350(B).

3. PARTIES

3.1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] is an adult individual residing in [COUNTY] County, Oklahoma, and was at all relevant times an "employee" within the meaning of 25 O.S. § 1301(2) and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(f).

3.2. Defendant [EMPLOYER ENTITY] is a [corporation / limited liability company / partnership] organized under the laws of [STATE], with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS], and is authorized to do and does business in Oklahoma. Defendant employed Plaintiff at its [CITY, OKLAHOMA] location.

3.3. At all relevant times, Defendant was an "employer" within the meaning of 25 O.S. § 1301(1) (covering employers of any size, including those with only one employee, since the Nov. 1, 2011 OADA amendments) [and an 'employer' within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b) employing fifteen (15) or more employees / 29 U.S.C. § 630(b) employing twenty (20) or more employees].

4. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4.1. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's OADA claims pursuant to Okla. Stat. tit. 25, § 1350(B) and Okla. Const. Art. VII, § 7.

4.2. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the parallel federal claims, or, in the alternative, concurrent original jurisdiction over Title VII, § 1981, ADEA, and ADA claims, which may be litigated in Oklahoma state court. See Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. v. Donnelly, 494 U.S. 820 (1990).

4.3. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County under 12 O.S. § 133 because Defendant transacts business in this County and the discriminatory acts complained of occurred in this County.

5. ADMINISTRATIVE EXHAUSTION

5.1. On [DATE], within 180 days of the last discriminatory act, Plaintiff timely filed a Charge of Discrimination (Charge No. [________________]) with the [Oklahoma Attorney General's Office of Civil Rights Enforcement / U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] alleging the conduct described herein. See 25 O.S. § 1350(B); 25 O.S. § 1502.

5.2. Pursuant to the EEOC/OCRE work-sharing agreement, the Charge was deemed dual-filed with the cooperating agency.

5.3. On [DATE], [OCRE / the EEOC] issued Plaintiff a Notice of Right to Sue. A true and correct copy is attached as Exhibit A.

5.4. This Petition is filed within ninety (90) days of Plaintiff's receipt of the Notice of Right to Sue, satisfying 25 O.S. § 1350(B)(2) [and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1)].

5.5. Plaintiff has fully and timely exhausted all administrative prerequisites to suit.

6. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6.1. Plaintiff is a member of a protected class, namely [describe — e.g., African-American / female / individual over the age of 40 / individual with a qualifying disability under 42 U.S.C. § 12102].

6.2. Plaintiff was hired by Defendant on or about [DATE] as a [POSITION TITLE] and was qualified for the position, possessing [describe qualifications].

6.3. Throughout Plaintiff's employment, Plaintiff performed all duties competently, met or exceeded all legitimate performance expectations, and received [describe positive reviews, raises, commendations].

6.4. Beginning on or about [DATE], Defendant, by and through its agents [NAMES / TITLES], subjected Plaintiff to discriminatory treatment because of Plaintiff's [protected class], including but not limited to:

• [Adverse action 1 — e.g., demotion, denial of promotion, pay cut, reduction in hours];
• [Adverse action 2 — e.g., disparate discipline, hostile work environment, slurs / harassment];
• [Adverse action 3 — e.g., refusal to accommodate disability, denial of leave];
• Termination of employment on [DATE] under pretextual circumstances.

6.5. Similarly situated employees outside Plaintiff's protected class were treated more favorably and were not subjected to the adverse actions described above. By way of example, [describe comparator(s)].

6.6. The reasons proffered by Defendant for the adverse action(s) were pretextual. [Describe specific evidence of pretext — shifting explanations, deviation from policy, temporal proximity, statistical evidence, statements by decisionmakers].

6.7. [For harassment claims] Plaintiff complained of the discriminatory conduct to [supervisor / HR] on [DATE(S)], but Defendant failed to take prompt and effective remedial action. Instead, the harassment continued and escalated.

6.8. [For retaliation claims] After Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by [describe — e.g., complaining of discrimination, participating in an investigation, filing a charge], Defendant retaliated by [describe adverse action] within [NUMBER] days/weeks.

6.9. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity, emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish, and other compensable injuries.

7. COUNT I — DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE OKLAHOMA ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT, 25 O.S. §§ 1302, 1350

7.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1.1 through 6.9.

7.2. The OADA makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to discharge or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or genetic information. 25 O.S. § 1302(A).

7.3. Defendant is an "employer" subject to the OADA under 25 O.S. § 1301(1), which since November 1, 2011 covers employers of any size.

7.4. Defendant intentionally discriminated against Plaintiff because of Plaintiff's [protected class] by subjecting Plaintiff to the adverse employment actions described above.

7.5. Defendant's conduct was the proximate cause of Plaintiff's damages.

7.6. Pursuant to 25 O.S. § 1350(G), Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief, reinstatement or front pay in lieu thereof, back pay, and liquidated damages in an amount equal to back pay.

8. COUNT II — RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF THE OKLAHOMA ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT, 25 O.S. § 1302

8.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1.1 through 7.6.

8.2. The OADA prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee who has opposed an unlawful discriminatory practice or filed a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any investigation, proceeding, or hearing under the Act. 25 O.S. § 1302(B).

8.3. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by [describe activity] on [DATE].

8.4. After Plaintiff's protected activity, Defendant took materially adverse action against Plaintiff by [describe action].

8.5. A causal connection exists between the protected activity and the adverse action, as evidenced by [temporal proximity / direct evidence / pattern].

8.6. Plaintiff is entitled to the full panoply of remedies under 25 O.S. § 1350(G).

9. COUNT III — PARALLEL FEDERAL CLAIM (Title VII / § 1981 / ADEA / ADA)

9.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1.1 through 8.6.

9.2. Defendant's conduct described herein violated [42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a) (Title VII) / 42 U.S.C. § 1981 / 29 U.S.C. § 623(a) (ADEA) / 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (ADA)].

9.3. Defendant's actions were intentional, willful, and undertaken with malice or reckless indifference to Plaintiff's federally protected rights, entitling Plaintiff to compensatory damages for emotional distress and punitive damages [subject to the caps in 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b) for Title VII / ADA — caps not applicable to § 1981].

9.4. Plaintiff is also entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under [42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k) / 42 U.S.C. § 1988 / 29 U.S.C. § 626(b)].

10. DAMAGES

10.1. Back pay and benefits. Lost wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, employer-paid insurance premiums, retirement contributions, and other employment benefits from the date of Defendant's unlawful conduct through the date of judgment, in an amount to be proven at trial but estimated at $[AMOUNT].

10.2. Front pay or reinstatement. Plaintiff seeks reinstatement to Plaintiff's former position with full seniority, or in the alternative, front pay in an amount to be proven at trial.

10.3. Liquidated damages (OADA). Pursuant to 25 O.S. § 1350(G), liquidated damages equal to the back-pay award.

10.4. Compensatory damages (federal counts only). Damages for emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, loss of enjoyment of life, and inconvenience, in an amount to be determined by the jury, subject to applicable statutory caps.

10.5. Punitive damages (federal counts only). Punitive damages to punish Defendant and deter similar conduct, in an amount to be determined by the jury.

10.6. Attorneys' fees and costs. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(k), 1988, and 12205, and 25 O.S. § 1350(G).

10.7. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the legal rate.

11. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against Defendant and grant the following relief:

• A. Declaratory judgment that Defendant's conduct violated the OADA and parallel federal civil rights laws;
• B. Permanent injunctive relief enjoining Defendant from engaging in further discriminatory or retaliatory practices, and ordering affirmative remedial measures including, where appropriate, training, policy revision, and posting of notice;
• C. Reinstatement of Plaintiff to Plaintiff's former position with full seniority and benefits, or front pay in lieu thereof;
• D. Back pay, with all benefits and prejudgment interest;
• E. Liquidated damages under 25 O.S. § 1350(G) equal to the back-pay award;
• F. Compensatory damages for emotional distress and other non-pecuniary losses on the federal counts;
• G. Punitive damages on the federal counts in an amount sufficient to punish and deter;
• H. Reasonable attorneys' fees, expert fees, and costs;
• I. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
• J. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

12. DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as a matter of right, pursuant to 25 O.S. § 1350(F), 12 O.S. § 2038, and the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution.

13. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this Petition pursuant to 12 O.S. § 2015 to assert additional claims, add parties, or conform the pleadings to the evidence as discovery proceeds.

14. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Date: [DATE]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], OBA No. [####]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, OKLAHOMA ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER]

Fax: [NUMBER]

Email: [EMAIL]

15. VERIFICATION

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

COUNTY OF [COUNTY]

I, [PLAINTIFF NAME], of lawful age, being first duly sworn upon oath, depose and state that I am the Plaintiff in the above-captioned action; that I have read the foregoing Petition; and that the matters and facts therein set forth are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

[________________________________]

[PLAINTIFF NAME]

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

[________________________________]

Notary Public

(My Commission Expires: [_______________])

(Commission No.: [________________])

16. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the [____] day of [_______________], 20[____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing VERIFIED PETITION was served upon Defendant by [summons and petition issued by the Court Clerk pursuant to 12 O.S. § 2004 / certified mail, return receipt requested / personal service by a process server] at the following address:

[DEFENDANT'S REGISTERED AGENT]

[ADDRESS FOR SERVICE]

[________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], OBA No. [####]

17. OKLAHOMA PRACTICE NOTES

Key Substantive Issues

• OADA exclusivity (post-Nov. 1, 2011). H.B. 1981 (2011) made the OADA the EXCLUSIVE state-law remedy for workplace discrimination. The Oklahoma Supreme Court confirmed in Brown v. Claims Mgmt. Res., Inc., 2017 OK 13, that the 2011 amendments abolished the common-law Burk public-policy tort for discrimination claims premised on protected classifications. Do not plead a Burk tort for race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or genetic-information discrimination. Burk remains available for non-discrimination public-policy violations (whistleblowing, refusing to commit illegal acts, etc.).
• Employer coverage. The OADA covers employers of any size, including employers with only one employee. 25 O.S. § 1301(1). For small employers below Title VII's 15-employee threshold or the ADEA's 20-employee threshold, the OADA may be the only remedy.
• Protected classes. Race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40+), disability, and genetic information. Oklahoma does NOT recognize sexual orientation or gender identity as protected classes under state law (though Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), brings them within Title VII's "sex" protection federally).
• Individual-defendant liability. Only "employers" — legal entities — are proper OADA defendants. 25 O.S. § 1350(A). Individual supervisors cannot be sued under the OADA. Section 1981 may permit individual-supervisor liability for race discrimination.
• Damages cap. OADA remedies are limited to (i) injunction; (ii) reinstatement/hiring; (iii) back pay; and (iv) liquidated damages = back pay. § 1350(G). Emotional-distress and punitive damages are NOT available under the OADA — pursue them through Title VII (subject to 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b) caps based on employer size: $50K/$100K/$200K/$300K) or § 1981 (no statutory cap).
• Attorneys' fees. Available to prevailing parties under § 1350(G), Title VII (§ 2000e-5(k)), § 1988, and the ADEA/ADA fee-shifting provisions.

Procedural Issues

• Exhaustion / 180-day OCRE charge. Plaintiff must file a Charge of Discrimination with OCRE or the EEOC within 180 days of the last discriminatory act. 25 O.S. § 1350(B); § 1502. The federal EEOC deadline of 300 days does NOT extend the OADA's 180-day period. Note: there is some authority that the 2013 EEOC/OCRE worksharing changes may affect dual-filing — confirm current practice with OCRE.
• Notice of Right to Sue. OCRE issues a Notice of Right to Sue upon request after 180 days, or upon dismissal/closure. § 1350(B)(2).
• 90-day suit window. Suit must be filed within 90 days of receipt of the Notice of Right to Sue. § 1350(B)(2). This is a strict limitations period.
• Statute of limitations — § 1981. Race-based contract claims (hiring, firing, promotion) have a four-year limitations period under 28 U.S.C. § 1658. Jones v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co., 541 U.S. 369 (2004).
• Public employers — additional notice. Discrimination claims against the State of Oklahoma or its political subdivisions may require additional notice under the Governmental Tort Claims Act, 51 O.S. § 151 et seq. See the public-employer notice ruling discussed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court regarding 25 O.S. § 1350.
• Jury trial. Either party is entitled to a jury trial on all disputed facts. 25 O.S. § 1350(F).
• Forum. OADA and parallel federal claims may be brought in Oklahoma district court (state) or U.S. district court (N.D., E.D., or W.D. Okla.). State court is concurrent for Title VII/§ 1981/ADEA/ADA. Removal to federal court is available under 28 U.S.C. § 1441.

Drafting Checklist

☐ Verify OCRE Charge No. and Notice of Right-to-Sue date (90-day clock)
☐ Confirm 180-day OCRE deadline was met from last act of discrimination
☐ Identify whether employer meets federal coverage thresholds (Title VII 15+, ADEA 20+)
☐ Confirm protected class is recognized under Oklahoma law (no SO/GI under OADA)
☐ Plead OADA against employer entity ONLY (not individual supervisors)
☐ Plead parallel federal counts to capture emotional-distress and punitive damages
☐ Do NOT plead Burk tort for any protected-class discrimination
☐ Attach Charge of Discrimination and Notice of Right to Sue as exhibits
☐ Demand jury trial in caption and dedicated section
☐ Verify Petition (state-court practice); omit verification if filing in federal court
☐ Confirm registered-agent address with Oklahoma Secretary of State for service

18. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act — Okla. Stat. tit. 25, §§ 1101–1901 — https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/Index.asp?ftdb=STOKST25&level=1
• 25 O.S. § 1302 (discriminatory employment practices) — https://oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/os25.pdf
• 25 O.S. § 1350 (employment discrimination — cause of action, remedies, procedure) — https://law.justia.com/codes/oklahoma/title-25/section-25-1350/
• 25 O.S. § 1502 (filing of complaints with OCRE) — https://law.justia.com/codes/oklahoma/title-25/section-25-1502-3/
• 2011 H.B. 1981 (OADA exclusivity amendments, eff. Nov. 1, 2011) — Oklahoma Legislature
• Brown v. Claims Mgmt. Res., Inc., 2017 OK 13, 391 P.3d 111 (OADA exclusivity; Burk abolition for discrimination claims) — https://www.oscn.net/
• Burk v. K-Mart Corp., 1989 OK 22, 770 P.2d 24 (public-policy tort, surviving for non-discrimination claims)
• Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020) (Title VII covers sexual orientation and gender identity)
• Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. v. Donnelly, 494 U.S. 820 (1990) (state-court concurrent jurisdiction over Title VII)
• McAfee & Taft, "Oklahoma's employment discrimination laws rewritten" — https://www.mcafeetaft.com/oklahomas-employment-discrimination-laws-rewritten/
• Oklahoma Attorney General's Office of Civil Rights Enforcement — https://oklahoma.gov/oag/about/divisions/civil-rights-enforcement.html
• Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. — https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964
• 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (equal contracting rights) — https://uscode.house.gov/
• Oklahoma Pleading Code, 12 O.S. §§ 2008–2015

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Oklahoma must review and customize this document before filing. The OADA was substantially amended by H.B. 1981 (eff. Nov. 1, 2011) and is now the EXCLUSIVE state-law remedy for workplace discrimination, abolishing the Burk tort for protected-class claims (Brown v. Claims Mgmt. Res., Inc., 2017 OK 13). Laws, citations, and court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.