Carlow v. 36th, 156th, 343rd Judicial Districts Community Supervision and Corrections Department

  • Court: State of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, District Court
  • Case Number: 2:22-cv-00183
  • Filed: August 5, 2022
  • Judge: Nelva Gonzales Ramos
  • Case Type: 440 Civil Rights – Other
  • Cause:28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

Parties Involved

  • Plaintiff(s):Janet Carlow
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Adam Poncio | Alan Braun
    • Expert witness for Plaintiff(s): Adam Poncio | Alan Braun
  • Defendant(s): 36th, 156th, 343rd Judicial Districts Community Supervision and Corrections Department
    • Counsel for Defendants: Casey Terrence Cullen
    • Expert witness for Defendant(s):Casey T. Cullen

 Verdict Information

  • Verdict Date: April 17,2024
  • Damages awarded to Plaintiff: $0 (Verdict for Defendant)

About the Sexual Harassment Case

Cause

Janet Carlow’s legal complaint against San Patricio County and its Community Supervision and Corrections Department (CSCD) paints a disturbing picture of sexual harassment and retaliation in the workplace. The crux of the matter revolves around Carlow’s supervisor, Anthony Sanchez, who subjected her to a torrent of unwelcome text messages and physical contact of a sexual nature in early 2020.

Even though Carlow clearly did not want Sanchez’s inappropriate behavior towards her, she did not file official complaints right away because she was afraid of retaliation or punishment – which sadly did end up happening to her later.The situation took an ominous turn on or around July 30, 2020, when Carlow faced severe professional repercussions. She was demoted from her supervisory role and suspended for two days, ostensibly for insubordination towards Sanchez and critiquing a subordinate’s work. This demotion not only stripped her of leadership responsibilities but also dealt a financial blow, shifting her from a salaried position to an hourly one.

Undeterred, Carlow mustered the courage to bring complaints of sexual harassment against Sanchez to the County Judge and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in August 2020. However, instead of prompting a thorough investigation, this act of speaking out triggered an escalation of retaliatory actions. Sanchez berated Carlow in front of colleagues. Her annual evaluation plummeted despite previously positive assessments. Additionally, she faced disciplinary actions for alleged tardiness and excessive work hours. Carlow vehemently denied these allegations as mere pretexts for further mistreatment. The alleged retaliation reached its apex on or around May 10, 2021, when Carlow was terminated.

Injury

Carlow’s complaint alleges a disturbing pattern of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation that she endured at the hands of her employer. Furthermore, Carlow’s complaint alleges that she faced discrimination and harassment not only on the basis of her sex but also her national origin. Despite bringing these serious allegations to the attention of the relevant authorities, the employer’s response was allegedly one of escalating hostility, culminating in her termination.

By engaging in such conduct, Carlow alleges that her employer violated the provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Additionally, the complaint cites violations of the Texas Labor Code, which offers protections against discrimination and retaliation in the workplace.

Damages

 In light of the alleged egregious conduct by her employer, Carlow’s complaint seeks comprehensive damages and relief to address the harm inflicted upon her. Foremost, she is pursuing compensation for the tangible financial losses incurred. These include lost wages, bonuses, salary, and benefits – both past and future. The complaint requests that the jury award her the full amount of back pay. This would cover what she would have earned had the discrimination and retaliation not occurred. Additionally, it seeks front pay to cover potential future lost earnings.

However, the damages sought extend beyond mere economic losses. Carlow’s complaint also aims to secure compensatory damages for the significant emotional distress, reputational harm, and overall pain and suffering endured as a consequence of her employer’s actions.

Moreover, the complaint seeks to recover the costs associated with bringing this legal action, including expert witness fees and attorney’s fees. Beyond monetary relief, Carlow’s complaint requests the award of any other appropriate legal and equitable remedies that the court deems just and warranted under the circumstances.

 Jury verdict

 The jury found that Carlow had not proven her claims of unwelcome sexual advances made by her supervisor, Anthony Sanchez. The evidence presented fell short of substantiating the specific accusations of sexual misconduct leveled against Sanchez. Furthermore, the jury did not believe Janet Carlow’s termination was solely due to her complaints about sexual harassment or discrimination.