Frazier V Jilly's

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST.
LOUIS COUNTY
21ST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
STATE OF MISSOURI
SHAYDEN FRAZIER,
Plaintiff,
v.
JILLYS CUPCAKE BAR, LLC,
Please Serve Registered Agent:
National Registered Agents, Inc.
120 South Central Avenue
Clayton, MO 63105
and
JILL SEGAL,
Please Serve:
Jillys Cupcake Bar & Caf
8509 Delmar Avenue
St. Louis, MO 63124
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.
Division:
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PETITION
In July 2014, a white employee of Defendant Jillys Cupcake Bar, LLC (Jillys)
directed the slur nigger at an African-American employee. Plaintiff Shayden Frazier, who is
also African-American, reported this to Defendant Jill Segal, owner of Jillys. After a meeting
with Segal and the store managers, Defendants fired Frazier and did not terminate the white
employee who used the racial slur.
In support of his claim, Plaintiff states as follows:
FACTS
1.!
Jillys owns and operates Jillys Cupcake Bar & Caf, a store that sells cupcakes,
desserts, and other food. Jill Segal is the owner and operator of Jillys.
Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM
15SL-CC02526
Frazier worked at Jillys as a cashier and server from August 2013 until his
termination on July 30, 2014.

3.!
Frazier, an African American, alleges that Defendants terminated him after he
informed Segal that a Caucasian employee, Alan (LNU), had directed the slur nigger at
another African American employee.
4.!
This one of many occasions Defendants discriminated against that Frazier on the
account of his race.

5.!
On August 18, 2014, Frazier reported this abuse to the U.S. Equal Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) and the Missouri Commission on Human Rights (MCHR).

6.!
Frazier seeks actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages,
injunctive relief, and attorneys fees against Defendants for violations of the Missouri Human
Rights Act (MHRA). 213.010 RSMo., et seq.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7.!
At all relevant times described in this Petition, Frazier was employed at Jillys and
resided in St. Louis County, State of Missouri.

8.!
Jillys is a business owned and operated by Segal.
9.!
Jillys is a limited liability company organized pursuant to the laws of Missouri
with its principal place of business in St. Louis County.

10.!
At all relevant times, Jillys was an employer within the meaning of
213.010(7) RSMo. because it employed six or more persons within the State of Missouri.
11.!
At all relevant times, Segal was an employer within the meaning of 213.010(7)
RSMo. because she was directly acting in the interest of Jillys and directly participated in the
unlawful discriminatory practices alleged below.
2.!
Pursuant to 213.111 RSMo., et seq., and Article V, 14(a) of the Missouri
Constitution, this Court has jurisdiction.

13.!
Pursuant to 213.111.1 RSMo., venue is proper in this court because the unlawful
discriminatory practices alleged herein occurred in St. Louis County.

14.!
Pursuant to 508.010 RSMo., venue is proper in this court in that the cause of
action accrued and Frazier was first injured by the wrongful acts of Defendants within St. Louis
County.
EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
15.!
On or about August 18, 2014, Frazier filed a Charge of Discrimination with the
U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission alleging discrimination on the basis of his sex and race.
16.!
The Missouri Commission on Human Rights accepted Fraziers filing upon
receipt by the EEOC.

17.!
On April 29, 2015, the MCHR issued a notice of right to sue. See Exhibit 1.
Accordingly, this action is timely filed.

HISTORY OF SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF HARASSMENT,
DISCRIMINATION, AND ABUSE
18.!
Throughout his employment at Jillys, Frazier has been constantly subjected to
harassment, abuse, discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment.

19.!
The following includes some, but not all, of the incidents of harassment, abuse,
discrimination, and retaliation that Frazier suffered at the hands of Defendants and Defendants
employees.
Mr. Fraziers Request that Jillys Provide Diversity and Racial Sensitivity Training is
Rejected
20.!
As early as November 24, 2013, Frazier asked Jillys manager Frank Gomes to
12.!
motivated incident that occurred a week earlier. On November 17, 2013, Frazier observed Darren
(LNU) (a Caucasian kitchen staff member) call a female, African American server nappy
headed and ugly. This occurred in the presence of several African American employees. Frazier
reported this incident during the November 24, 2013 meeting. Rather than take action against the
harassing employee, manager Gomes refused Fraziers request for diversity and racial sensitivity
training.
21.!
After the November 24, 2013 meeting, Mike Johnson, another African American
employee, approached Frazier and stated that he had suffered similar racist abuse but was afraid
to take it to management.
Frazier Harassed and Held to Different Grooming Standards than Caucasian Employees
22.!
Throughout Fraziers employment, Segal and Jillys management held him to
different dress standards than required of the Caucasian employees.

23.!
Frazier was required to wear a hat and hairnet while multiple Caucasian
employees were not required to wear a hair net.

24.!
On March 27, 2014, Frazier showed Segal a long hair from one of the Caucasian
employees named Kim (LNU) that had ended up in a customers cup. Segal responded by
mockingly stating that My hair does the same thing, then flipping her hair, walked outside to
smoke with the employee whose hair ended up in the customers cup.
25.!
Eventually, Frazier shaved his head; yet, this did not satisfy Segal. Segal then
moved from harassing about his hair to harassing Frazier to shave off his beard. Segal demanded
that Frazier shave his beard even though she allowed two Caucasian workers to keep beards that
were significantly longer than Fraziers.
provide diversity and racial sensitivity training to the staff and managers because of a racially
26.!
On April 10, 2014, Frazier was written up for calling off sick on April 6, 2014
and April 9, 2014. On June 8, 2014, Frazier informed manager Gomes that he would be arriving
late. Upon his arrival three minutes after his appointed start time, Frazier was cursed at by
manager Gomes.
27.!
These two incidents were in stark contrast to manager Gomes reaction to a
Caucasian employees failure to show up at work and failure to inform her managers ahead of
time.
28.!
On July 27, 2014, Samantha Robbins, a female, Caucasian employee, failed to
show up to work. Gomes told Frazier Im worried because she usually shows up unlike you.
Frazier was taken aback by this comment because he had only ever called off due to illness and
had informed his managers before work. Gomes proceed to send multiple texts and attempt to
reach Samantha by phone. When Frazier hypothesized that the employee had probably overslept,
Gomes said, It probably caught up to her because she doesnt sleep and stated that it was
obvious she needed rest.
29.!
An hour and a half later, the employee finally called in. Rather than disciplining
her like he had disciplined Frazier, manager Gomes told Samantha that he worr(ied) about (her)
like my own child.
30.!
Although Segal was aware that managers were acting in a hostile or demeaning
manner toward Frazier, Segal did not adequately discipline those employees.
Moreover,
Defendants readily disciplined Frazier, an African-American male, for an incident where he

called in sick while not discipline a Caucasian employee for failing to show up at work.
Mr. Frazier Disciplined while Similarly Situated Caucasian Employees are Not
31.!
On July 27, 2014, Kyron (LNU), a young African-American server approached
Frazier. Frazier observed that Kyron was noticeably upset and shaken. Kyron told Frazier that
Alan, a Caucasian employee, had used and directed the racial slur nigger at Kyron and that
Kyron was extremely disturbed by the incident. Kyron further explained that he approached
Frazier because he (Kyron) did not feel comfortable taking the matter to management because of
managements history of not taking action against racial abusers.
32.!
Frazier immediately asked Segal to meet with him and Kyron about the incident.
Segal joined Frazier and Kyron outside where Kyron explained the incident to Segal.
33.!
Segal called a staff meeting to discuss the incident. Segal held the staff meeting
later the same day and in an area within earshot of the dining room. Segal, Frazier, Kyron, Alan,
and three other employees participated in the meeting. Frazier audiotaped the meeting.
34.!
The meeting became heated. Alan admitted to using the slur, but claimed that it
was appropriate because Kyron had used the term white boy. Kyron admitted to stating
wheres the white boy? but stated that it was in reference to his question regarding the
whereabouts of a Caucasian dishwasher whose name he was did not know.
35.!
The meeting became heated when Dana (LNU) (a Caucasian employee) began
directing derogatory language at Frazier. She told him to shut the fuck up!
36.!
During the meeting, Frazier brought up Alans long history of using racial and
sexually charged slurs. Specifically, Frazier told Segal that Alan constantly used the term bitch
to refer to women and oriental to refer to people of Asian descent.
37.!
Alan attempted to defend himself by stating I have a Black in my family.
38.!
Toward the end of the meeting, Frazier told Segal that he felt nauseous. Segal
Frazier Terminated for Reporting an Employees Use of the Slur Nigger
39.!
On July 30, 2015, Frazier returned to work and was terminated. Frazier was the
only employee terminated as the result of the incident.

COUNT I
Racial Discrimination in Violation of 213 RSMo.
40.!
Frazier reasserts and re-alleges the allegations set forth above.
41.!
Frazier is an African American.
42.!
Defendants have allowed, fostered, and maintained a racially discriminatory
climate, resulting in a hostile place of employment for Frazier.

43.!
As discussed in detail above, Defendants have taken adverse actions against
Frazier, including being terminated and written up.

44.!
Frazier was subjected to discrimination with respect the terms, conditions and/or
privileges of his employment.

45.!
Defendants applied different terms and conditions of employment to non-African
Americans, including different standards of conduct.

46.!
Defendant limited, segregated and classified Frazier in a way that adversely
affected his status as an employee.

47.!
Fraziers race (African American) was a contributing factor in the adverse action
taken by Defendants.
48.!
Defendants knew or should have known about this discrimination, and
Defendants did not take appropriate action.

49.!
Frazier has exhausted all of his administrative remedies. Frazier has suffered and
will continue to suffer lost wages and benefits of employment.

50.!
Frazier has suffered severe psychological and emotional distress as a result of
directed Frazier to go home.
51.!
Frazier seeks compensatory damages, including damages for emotional distress.
52.!
Frazier seeks punitive damages, as Defendants actions were intentional, wanton,
and unconscionable.
COUNT II
Harassment in Violation of 213 RSMo.
53.!
54.!
Frazier is an African American.
55.!
Defendants have subjected Frazier to racially-motivated harassment, abuse,
unwarranted discipline, and intense scrutiny by Defendants and their employees.

56.!
Caucasian employees have not been subject to the same harassment, abuse,
discipline, and intense scrutiny as African American employees.

57.!
As discussed in detail above, Defendants have taken adverse actions against
Frazier, including Frazier being terminated and written up.

58.!
Fraziers race (African American) was a contributing factor in the adverse action
taken by Defendants.
59.!
Defendants knew or should have known about this harassment and abuse, and
Defendants did not take appropriate action.

60.!
Frazier has exhausted all of his administrative remedies. Frazier has suffered and
will continue to suffer lost wages and benefits of employment.

61.!
Defendants actions.
62.!
63.!
Defendants actions.
COUNT III
Retaliation in Violation of 213 RSMo.
64.!
65.!
Frazier engaged in protected activity when he complained about Alans use of a
racial slur and when he requested that Defendant provide diversity and racial sensitivity training.
66.!
Defendants have retaliated against Frazier because he opposed the Defendants
racially discriminatory practices, which are prohibited under 213 RSMo.

67.!
Fraziers reporting the use of a racial slur and requesting that Defendants provide
diversity and racial sensitivity training were contributing factors in the adverse action taken by
Defendants and the abuse directed at Frazier by Defendants.
68.!
Frazier has exhausted all of his administrative remedies.
69.!
Frazier has suffered and will continue to suffer lost wages and benefits of
employment.
70.!
Defendants actions.
71.!
72.!
and unconscionable.
and unconscionable.
(a)!
For compensatory damages in excess of $25,000;
(b)!
For punitive damages;
(c)!
For his cost of suit, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred herein; and
(d)!
For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Javad M. Khazaeli

Javad M. Khazaeli, #53735
James R. Wyrsch, #53197
Attorneys for Plaintiff
KHAZAELI WYRSCH STOCK LLC
911 Washington Avenue, Suite 211
St. Louis, MO 63101
(314) 288-0777
javad.khazaeli@kwslawfirm.com
james.wyrsch@kwslawfirm.com
10
WHEREFORE, Frazier demands judgment against Defendant as follows:

Frazier V Jilly's

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Frazier V Jilly's

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM

termination on July 30, 2014.

Frazier, an African American, alleges that Defendants terminated him after he

account of his race.

Commission (EEOC) and the Missouri Commission on Human Rights (MCHR).

Frazier seeks actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages,

resided in St. Louis County, State of Missouri.

Jillys is a business owned and operated by Segal.

Jillys is a limited liability company organized pursuant to the laws of Missouri

with its principal place of business in St. Louis County.

At all relevant times, Jillys was an employer within the meaning of

Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM

Pursuant to 213.111 RSMo., et seq., and Article V, 14(a) of the Missouri

Constitution, this Court has jurisdiction.

discriminatory practices alleged herein occurred in St. Louis County.

The Missouri Commission on Human Rights accepted Fraziers filing upon

receipt by the EEOC.

Accordingly, this action is timely filed.

Throughout his employment at Jillys, Frazier has been constantly subjected to

harassment, abuse, discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment.

Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM

Throughout Fraziers employment, Segal and Jillys management held him to

different dress standards than required of the Caucasian employees.

employees were not required to wear a hair net.

Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM

These two incidents were in stark contrast to manager Gomes reaction to a

On July 27, 2014, Samantha Robbins, a female, Caucasian employee, failed to

Defendants readily disciplined Frazier, an African-American male, for an incident where he

Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM

On July 27, 2014, Kyron (LNU), a young African-American server approached

Alan attempted to defend himself by stating I have a Black in my family.

Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM

Frazier Terminated for Reporting an Employees Use of the Slur Nigger

only employee terminated as the result of the incident.

Frazier reasserts and re-alleges the allegations set forth above.

Frazier is an African American.

Defendants have allowed, fostered, and maintained a racially discriminatory

climate, resulting in a hostile place of employment for Frazier.

As discussed in detail above, Defendants have taken adverse actions against

Frazier, including being terminated and written up.

privileges of his employment.

Defendants applied different terms and conditions of employment to non-African

Americans, including different standards of conduct.

Defendant limited, segregated and classified Frazier in a way that adversely

affected his status as an employee.

Defendants knew or should have known about this discrimination, and

Defendants did not take appropriate action.

will continue to suffer lost wages and benefits of employment.

Frazier has suffered severe psychological and emotional distress as a result of

Electronically Filed - St Louis County - July 27, 2015 - 08:33 PM

directed Frazier to go home.

Frazier seeks compensatory damages, including damages for emotional distress.

Frazier seeks punitive damages, as Defendants actions were intentional, wanton,

Frazier reasserts and re-alleges the allegations set forth above.

Frazier is an African American.

Defendants have subjected Frazier to racially-motivated harassment, abuse,

unwarranted discipline, and intense scrutiny by Defendants and their employees.

discipline, and intense scrutiny as African American employees.

As discussed in detail above, Defendants have taken adverse actions against

Frazier, including Frazier being terminated and written up.

Defendants did not take appropriate action.