Rhode Island State Civil Rights Complaint (FEPA Ch. 28-5 + RICRA Ch. 42-112)

RHODE ISLAND STATE CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT — EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION (FEPA + RICRA + Parallel Federal Claims)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Nature of the Action
3. Parties
4. Jurisdiction and Venue
5. Administrative Exhaustion
6. Factual Allegations
7. Count I — Discrimination in Violation of FEPA (R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7)
8. Count II — Hostile Work Environment / Harassment (FEPA)
9. Count III — Retaliation (R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(5))
10. Count IV — Aiding and Abetting (R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(6))
11. Count V — Rhode Island Civil Rights Act of 1990 (R.I.G.L. § 42-112-1)
12. Count VI — Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
13. Count VII — Parallel Federal Claims (ADA / ADEA / § 1981)
14. Damages
15. Prayer for Relief
16. Jury Demand
17. Signature and Service Blocks
18. Verification
19. Certificate of Service
20. Rhode Island Practice Notes
21. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

[PROVIDENCE / KENT / WASHINGTON / NEWPORT / BRISTOL] COUNTY

SUPERIOR COURT

C.A. NO. [________________________________]

VERIFIED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

(Employment Discrimination — FEPA, RICRA, and Parallel Federal Claims)

Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME], by and through undersigned counsel, complaining of Defendants, alleges as follows:

2. NATURE OF THE ACTION

2.1. This is a civil action for damages and equitable relief arising out of unlawful employment discrimination, harassment, and retaliation committed by Defendants against Plaintiff in violation of the Rhode Island Fair Employment Practices Act ("FEPA"), R.I.G.L. § 28-5-1 et seq.; the Rhode Island Civil Rights Act of 1990 ("RICRA"), R.I.G.L. § 42-112-1 et seq.; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; and [ADA / ADEA / § 1981 — as applicable].

2.2. Plaintiff seeks back pay, front pay, compensatory damages for emotional distress, punitive and exemplary damages, equitable relief including reinstatement, declaratory relief, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, attorney's fees, and costs.

3. PARTIES

3.1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] is an adult individual residing in [CITY, COUNTY], Rhode Island. At all times relevant, Plaintiff was an "employee" within the meaning of R.I.G.L. § 28-5-6(7).

3.2. Defendant [EMPLOYER NAME] is a [corporation / limited liability company / partnership] organized under the laws of [STATE] with a principal place of business at [ADDRESS], [CITY], Rhode Island. Defendant employed four (4) or more employees in Rhode Island at all times relevant and is therefore an "employer" within the meaning of R.I.G.L. § 28-5-6(8)(i).

3.3. Defendant [INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT NAME] is, on information and belief, an adult individual residing in [CITY, STATE] who, during the relevant period, served as [TITLE — e.g., Plaintiff's direct supervisor / Vice-President of Operations] for Defendant [EMPLOYER NAME] and is sued individually under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(6) (aiding and abetting) and under RICRA, R.I.G.L. § 42-112-1, which reaches private actors without a state-action requirement.

4. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4.1. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 8-2-13 (general civil jurisdiction of the Superior Court) and R.I.G.L. § 28-5-24.1 (FEPA superior court actions following right-to-sue).

4.2. This Court has concurrent jurisdiction over Plaintiff's federal claims pursuant to Yellow Freight Sys. v. Donnelly, 494 U.S. 820 (1990), and R.I.G.L. § 8-2-14.

4.3. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County pursuant to R.I.G.L. §§ 9-4-3 and 28-5-28 because the unlawful employment practices alleged herein occurred in [COUNTY] County and Defendant [EMPLOYER] maintains a place of business in [COUNTY] County.

5. ADMINISTRATIVE EXHAUSTION

5.1. On [DATE], within one (1) year of the alleged unlawful employment practice and pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 28-5-17, Plaintiff timely filed a verified Charge of Discrimination with the Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights ("RICHR"), Charge No. [________________________________] (the "RICHR Charge").

5.2. The RICHR Charge was dual-filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") pursuant to the RICHR-EEOC work-sharing agreement, EEOC Charge No. [________________________________].

5.3. More than one hundred twenty (120) days have elapsed since the filing of the RICHR Charge. On [DATE], in compliance with R.I.G.L. § 28-5-24.1, Plaintiff requested and received a Notice of Right to Sue from RICHR (the "RI Right-to-Sue Notice"). A true and accurate copy is attached as Exhibit A.

5.4. On [DATE], Plaintiff received a Notice of Right to Sue from the EEOC (the "Federal Right-to-Sue Notice"). A true and accurate copy is attached as Exhibit B.

5.5. This action is filed within ninety (90) days of the RI Right-to-Sue Notice and within ninety (90) days of the Federal Right-to-Sue Notice. All conditions precedent to suit have been satisfied or excused.

5.6. Plaintiff's claims under RICRA (Count V) require no administrative exhaustion and are independently timely under the three-year statute of limitations of R.I.G.L. § 42-112-2.

6. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6.1. Plaintiff was hired by Defendant [EMPLOYER NAME] on or about [HIRE DATE] as a [POSITION TITLE].

6.2. Throughout Plaintiff's employment, Plaintiff performed the essential functions of the position competently and met or exceeded all legitimate expectations.

6.3. Plaintiff is a member of the following protected class(es) under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7 and § 42-112-1: [e.g., race (African American); sex (female); national origin (Cape Verdean); age (53); disability; sexual orientation; gender identity].

6.4. Beginning on or about [DATE], Defendants subjected Plaintiff to disparate treatment because of Plaintiff's protected class, including but not limited to:

• [Specific adverse action #1 — e.g., demotion, denial of promotion, exclusion from meetings];
• [Specific adverse action #2 — e.g., disparate discipline, denial of training, pay disparity];
• [Specific adverse action #3 — e.g., reassignment to less desirable shifts].

6.5. [Comparator allegations: identify similarly-situated employees outside Plaintiff's protected class who were treated more favorably, with names or initials and dates.]

6.6. [Direct evidence allegations, if any: quote any explicit slurs, biased statements, or written communications that reveal animus, with dates, speakers, and witnesses.]

6.7. On or about [DATE], Plaintiff complained about the discriminatory conduct to [HR / supervisor / hotline]. Defendants failed to investigate adequately and took no remedial action.

6.8. On or about [DATE], in retaliation for Plaintiff's protected complaint, Defendants [DESCRIBE RETALIATORY ACTION — e.g., terminated, demoted, reduced hours] Plaintiff.

6.9. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered lost wages and benefits, lost employment opportunities, emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish, damage to reputation, and other compensatory damages.

7. COUNT I — DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF FEPA (R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7)

7.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 6.9 as if fully set forth herein.

7.2. Defendant [EMPLOYER NAME] is an "employer" within R.I.G.L. § 28-5-6(8)(i) (four or more employees) and is bound by FEPA.

7.3. Defendants discriminated against Plaintiff in the terms and conditions of employment because of Plaintiff's [protected class] in violation of R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(1).

7.4. Defendants' conduct was intentional and was motivated, at least in part, by Plaintiff's [protected class].

7.5. Defendants' conduct was willful, malicious, and undertaken with reckless indifference to Plaintiff's statutorily protected rights, entitling Plaintiff to punitive damages under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-29.1.

7.6. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has suffered damages as described in Section 14.

8. COUNT II — HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT / HARASSMENT (FEPA)

8.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 7.6 as if fully set forth herein.

8.2. Defendants subjected Plaintiff to unwelcome conduct based on Plaintiff's [protected class] that was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of Plaintiff's employment and create an abusive working environment, in violation of R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(1) and (7).

8.3. The hostile environment was both subjectively offensive to Plaintiff and objectively offensive to a reasonable person in Plaintiff's circumstances.

8.4. Defendant [EMPLOYER NAME] knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt and effective remedial action.

8.5. The individual Defendant [NAME] is personally liable as a perpetrator of harassment and as one who aided and abetted the same. R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(6).

9. COUNT III — RETALIATION (R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(5))

9.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 8.5.

9.2. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(5) by [opposing discriminatory practices / making an internal complaint / filing the RICHR Charge / participating in an investigation].

9.3. Defendants subjected Plaintiff to materially adverse action(s) — including [describe] — because of Plaintiff's protected activity.

9.4. A causal connection exists between Plaintiff's protected activity and the adverse action(s), as shown by [temporal proximity, pattern of antagonism, deviation from policy, shifting explanations].

9.5. The retaliation was willful and undertaken with malice or reckless indifference to Plaintiff's protected rights, supporting punitive damages under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-29.1.

10. COUNT IV — AIDING AND ABETTING (R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(6))

10.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 9.5.

10.2. Defendant [INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT] aided, abetted, incited, compelled, or coerced the unlawful employment practices alleged herein, in violation of R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7(6), and is personally liable for the resulting damages.

11. COUNT V — RHODE ISLAND CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1990 (R.I.G.L. § 42-112-1)

11.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 10.2.

11.2. R.I.G.L. § 42-112-1 guarantees all persons within Rhode Island, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, disability, age, or country of ancestral origin, the same rights to make and enforce contracts, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and have the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property.

11.3. RICRA reaches both public and PRIVATE actors and does NOT require state action. Ward v. City of Pawtucket Police Dep't, 639 A.2d 1379 (R.I. 1994); Iacampo v. Hasbro, Inc., 929 F. Supp. 562 (D.R.I. 1996).

11.4. Defendants' discriminatory and retaliatory conduct interfered with Plaintiff's right to make and enforce the employment contract on equal terms with employees outside Plaintiff's protected class, in violation of R.I.G.L. § 42-112-1.

11.5. Pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 42-112-2, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief, compensatory damages, exemplary damages, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs of litigation.

11.6. This Count is timely, having been filed within three (3) years of the most recent violation as required by R.I.G.L. § 42-112-2(a).

12. COUNT VI — TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964

12.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 11.6.

12.2. Defendant [EMPLOYER] is an "employer" within 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b) employing fifteen (15) or more employees.

12.3. Defendants' conduct constitutes unlawful discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a) and 2000e-3(a).

12.4. Plaintiff exhausted administrative remedies as set forth in Section 5 above.

13. COUNT VII — PARALLEL FEDERAL CLAIMS (ADA / ADEA / § 1981)

13.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 12.4.

13.2. [ADA] Defendants discriminated against Plaintiff because of Plaintiff's disability and/or failed to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112(a) and (b)(5)(A).

13.3. [ADEA] Defendants discriminated against Plaintiff (age 40 or older) because of age in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 623(a).

13.4. [§ 1981] Defendants intentionally interfered with Plaintiff's right to make and enforce contracts on equal terms because of race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981.

14. DAMAGES

14.1. Economic damages: lost wages and benefits (back pay) of approximately $[AMOUNT] through filing, plus front pay and lost future earnings, lost retirement contributions, and lost employer-paid benefits, in amounts to be proven at trial.

14.2. Non-economic damages: emotional distress, humiliation, anxiety, mental anguish, loss of professional reputation, and loss of enjoyment of life — all uncapped under FEPA and RICRA.

14.3. Punitive / exemplary damages: under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-29.1 (FEPA) and R.I.G.L. § 42-112-2(a) (RICRA exemplary damages), in light of Defendants' malice, ill will, and reckless indifference to Plaintiff's rights.

14.4. Attorney's fees and costs: under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-24, R.I.G.L. § 42-112-2(b), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k), and 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

14.5. Equitable relief: reinstatement (or front pay in lieu), expungement of disciplinary records, neutral letter of reference, and injunctive relief against further violations.

14.6. Pre- and post-judgment interest: pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 9-21-10 (12% statutory pre-judgment interest on all civil actions for pecuniary damages).

15. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in Plaintiff's favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally, and award:

• A. Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, including back pay, front pay, lost benefits, and damages for emotional distress;
• B. Punitive damages under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-29.1 and exemplary damages under R.I.G.L. § 42-112-2(a);
• C. Reasonable attorney's fees and costs under R.I.G.L. § 28-5-24, R.I.G.L. § 42-112-2(b), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k), and 42 U.S.C. § 1988;
• D. Pre-judgment interest at 12% under R.I.G.L. § 9-21-10 and post-judgment interest;
• E. Equitable relief including reinstatement, expungement, neutral references, and an injunction against further violations;
• F. Declaratory relief that Defendants' conduct violated the FEPA, RICRA, Title VII, and applicable parallel federal law;
• G. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

16. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as a matter of right pursuant to R.I. Super. R. Civ. P. 38(b) and the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution.

17. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Date: [DATE]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], R.I. Bar No. [####]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER]

Email: [EMAIL]

18. VERIFICATION

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

COUNTY OF [COUNTY]

I, [PLAINTIFF NAME], being first duly sworn, depose and say 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 same is true to my own knowledge except as to those matters stated upon information and belief, and as to those, I believe them to be true.

[________________________________]

[PLAINTIFF NAME]

Sworn to and subscribed before me this [____] day of [_______________], 20[____].

[________________________________]

Notary Public

(My Commission Expires: [_______________])

19. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the [____] day of [_______________], 20[____], I caused a true and accurate copy of the foregoing VERIFIED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL to be served upon all counsel of record (or, where unrepresented, upon the parties) via the Rhode Island Judiciary Electronic Filing System ("EFS") and/or by First-Class United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

[SERVICE LIST WITH NAMES, FIRMS, AND ADDRESSES]

[________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME]

20. RHODE ISLAND PRACTICE NOTES

• Pleading standard. Rhode Island Superior Court applies federal-style plausibility pleading. Chhun v. MERS, 84 A.3d 419 (R.I. 2014). State the elements of each count with concrete supporting facts.
• Exhaustion is jurisdictional for FEPA but NOT for RICRA. A plaintiff who misses the one-year RICHR filing window can often still proceed under RICRA's three-year SOL, but loses the FEPA claim. Always plead both where eligible.
• Right-to-sue mechanics. Under § 28-5-24.1, the complainant may request a right-to-sue letter no earlier than 120 days and no later than 2 years after charge filing. Once issued, suit must be filed within 90 days.
• Statute of limitations matrix.
• FEPA charge filing: 1 year (§ 28-5-17).
• FEPA suit after right-to-sue: 90 days (§ 28-5-24.1).
• RICRA: 3 years from violation (§ 42-112-2(a)) — extended from 1 year by 2010 amendment.
• Title VII suit after EEOC right-to-sue: 90 days.
• § 1981: 4 years (28 U.S.C. § 1658) for post-1991 amendment claims.
• Damages — no caps. Neither FEPA nor RICRA caps compensatory or punitive/exemplary damages. (Federal Title VII compensatory + punitive damages are capped by 42 U.S.C. § 1981a, sliding scale by employer size.)
• Punitive damages limit. R.I.G.L. § 28-5-29.1 BARS punitive damages against the State and its political subdivisions; consider pleading individual-capacity liability where appropriate.
• Pre-judgment interest. R.I.G.L. § 9-21-10 imposes 12% simple pre-judgment interest on pecuniary damages — a meaningful settlement-leverage point.
• Individual liability. FEPA § 28-5-7(6) reaches individuals who aid, abet, incite, compel, or coerce. RICRA reaches private actors directly. Plead supervisors and HR officials personally where supported.
• Hairstyle protection. Rhode Island's 2022 CROWN-style amendments to FEPA expanded "race" to include traits historically associated with race, including hair texture and protective hairstyles.
• Pregnancy and lactation. R.I.G.L. § 28-5-7.4 codifies reasonable accommodation for pregnancy-, childbirth-, lactation-, and menopause-related conditions.
• Forum choice. Plaintiffs may sue in Rhode Island Superior Court or U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. Federal court forum may be preferable when the case turns on federal claims with broader discovery; Superior Court may be preferable for FEPA/RICRA claims because of the 12% statutory pre-judgment interest and uncapped punitive damages.
• Service. Service on a corporate defendant must comply with R.I. Super. R. Civ. P. 4(e); service on the State or municipality must comply with Rule 4(e)(5) and the relevant tort-claims statute.

21. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• R.I.G.L. Title 28, ch. 5 (Fair Employment Practices) — https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/Statutes/TITLE28/28-5/INDEX.htm
• R.I.G.L. Title 42, ch. 112 (Civil Rights Act of 1990) — https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/Statutes/TITLE42/42-112/INDEX.htm
• R.I.G.L. § 9-21-10 (Pre-judgment interest) — https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/Statutes/TITLE9/9-21/INDEX.htm
• Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights — https://richr.ri.gov/
• Rhode Island Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure — https://www.courts.ri.gov/Courts/superiorcourt/
• Chhun v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., 84 A.3d 419 (R.I. 2014) (plausibility pleading)
• Ward v. City of Pawtucket Police Dep't, 639 A.2d 1379 (R.I. 1994) (RICRA reaches private actors)
• Iacampo v. Hasbro, Inc., 929 F. Supp. 562 (D.R.I. 1996) (RICRA in employment)
• Horn v. Southern Union Co., 927 A.2d 292 (R.I. 2007) (FEPA exhaustion)
• Rathbun v. Autozone, Inc., 361 F.3d 62 (1st Cir. 2004) (FEPA timing)
• 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (Title VII)
• 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (ADA)
• 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (ADEA)
• 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Equal contract rights)
• EEOC-RICHR Work-Sharing Agreement

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Rhode Island must review and customize this document before filing. Statutes, court rules, and case law change frequently; verify all authorities before use.