Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

DERRICK ELIAS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF

GADSDEN COUNTY BOARD OF

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, and
BRENDA HOLT, in her official
capacity as CHAIRPERSON of the
GADSDEN COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,

Defendant.
________________________________/

DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Defendants GADSDEN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY

COMMISSIONERS (“GCBOCC”) and BRENDA HOLT (“Holt”) (collectively

“Defendants”), through counsel, respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint as follows. All

allegations not specifically admitted are denied. As to the correspondingly numbered

paragraphs of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.

2. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.

 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 2 of 10

THE PARTIES

3. Admitted for jurisdictional and venue purposes only.

4. Admitted for jurisdictional and venue purposes only.

5. Admitted Defendant Holt has served as a member or Chairperson of the

GCBOCC. Denied as to the remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 5 of Plaintiff’s

Complaint as to Holt independently.

STATEMENT OF THE ULTIMATE FACTS

6. Admitted.

7. Admitted.

8. Admitted.

9. Admitted the GCBOCC approved Plaintiff as County Administrator by

a 4-1 vote, following an initial 3-2 vote in which the GCBOCC did not approve

Plaintiff for the position. Admitted Defendant Holt was the only Commissioner

opposing the approval at the time of the second vote.

10. Admitted Lonyell Butler contacted Plaintiff after the approval vote to

address initial documentation in anticipation of Plaintiff and the GCBOCC reaching

an agreement on Plaintiff’s contract.

11. Admitted Lonyell Butler discussed subsequent actions to be taken in

anticipation of Plaintiff and the GCBOCC reaching an agreement on Plaintiff’s

contract.

2
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 3 of 10

12. Admitted Lonyell Butler provided Plaintiff with the contracts of two

prior County Administrators at his request. Further admitted that Lonyell Butler

communicated her understanding that the GCBOCC had budgeted a maximum

amount of $127,500.00 for the expenses related to the County Administrator

position. Denied any representation or information from Ms. Butler represented any

agreement to or promise to pay Plaintiff any particular salary amount or to confirm

a final employment decision or agreement had been reached with GCBOCC. Denied

as to the remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 12 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

13. Admitted Plaintiff submitted a proposed contract to the GCBOCC.

Denied as to the remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 13 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

14. Denied.

15. Denied.

16. Denied.

17. Denied.

18. Denied.

19. Denied.

20. Denied.

21. Denied.

22. Denied.

23. Denied.

3
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 4 of 10

24. Admitted Defendant Holt became Chairperson of the GCBOCC on or

about November 17, 2020. Further admitted Defendant Holt made a motion to offer

the contract offered to Plaintiff to Edward Dixon following Plaintiff’s rejection of

the contract. Admitted the motion of Defendant Holt did not receive a second.

Denied as to the remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 24 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

25. Admitted GCBOCC prepared an agenda for the subsequent meeting.

Denied as to the remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 25 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

26. Admitted Plaintiff attempted to send an email to the GCBOCC County

Attorney and the Commissioners. Denied as to the remaining allegations of

Paragraph No. 26 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

27. Admitted Defendant GCBOCC voted to cease negotiations with

Plaintiff based on Plaintiff’s rejection of the terms and conditions of the GCBOCC

for the position of County Administrator. Denied as to remaining allegations of

Paragraph No. 27 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

28. Admitted that GCBOCC proceeded to vote to approve Edward Dixon

as County Administrator based on Plaintiff’s rejection of the offer made to Plaintiff.

29. Admitted that GCBOCC presented a contract for employment

containing the terms and conditions Plaintiff rejected.

4
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 5 of 10

COUNT I – DUE PROCESS VIOLATION

30. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraph Nos. 1-29 of

Plaintiff’s Complaint as stated above.

31. Denied.

32. Denied.

33. Denied.

34. Denied.

35. Denied.

COUNT II – DUE PROCESS VIOLATION

36. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraph Nos. 1-29 of

Plaintiff’s Complaint as stated above.

37. Denied.

38. Denied.

39. Denied.

40. Denied.

41. Denied.

42. Denied.

COUNT III – DUE PROCESS VIOLATION

43. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraph Nos. 1-29 of

Plaintiff’s Complaint as stated above.

5
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 6 of 10

44. Denied.

45. Denied.

46. Denied.

47. Denied.

48. Denied.

COUNT IV – FIRST AMENDMENT RETALIATION

49. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraph Nos. 1-29 of

Plaintiff’s Complaint as stated above.

50. Denied.

51. Denied.

52. Denied.

53. Denied.

54. Denied.

55. Admitted Defendant Holt is an elected official of Gadsden County.

Denied as to the remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 55 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

56. Denied.

57. Denied.

58. Denied.

59. Denied as to any wrongdoing by GCBOCC or Defendant Holt.

60. Denied.

6
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 7 of 10

COUNT V – CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CIVIL RIGHTS

61. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraph Nos. 1-29 of

Plaintiff’s Complaint as stated above.

62. Denied any violation of civil rights occurred.

63. Denied.

64. Denied.

65. Denied.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Regardless of whether Plaintiff seeks equitable, injunctive, or compensatory

relief, Defendants deny Plaintiff’s entitlement to same and incorporates the

Affirmative Defenses below.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

In an abundance of caution, Defendants allege the following additional

defenses, some of which may be affirmative defenses. These allegations are raised

strictly as defenses and are not to be considered admissions of Defendants as to any

factual, legal, or other matters. All allegations not specifically admitted are denied.

A. Plaintiff’s claims are barred and the Court lacks jurisdiction over such

claims insofar as Plaintiff has failed to satisfy any or all of the prerequisites for

maintaining such an action.

7
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 8 of 10

B. Plaintiff's claims are barred insofar as Plaintiff has failed to satisfy all

administrative remedies prior to the filing of his Complaint.

C. Plaintiff is not entitled to recover lost remuneration, attorneys’ fees and

costs, or reinstatement insofar as Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his damages or, if

the Plaintiff is deemed to be so entitled, Defendants are entitled to an offset to the

extent that Plaintiff has failed to take mitigating measures to reduce each and every

component of his alleged damages. Any award should be reduced by her actual (or

imputed reasonable diligence) interim earnings, by taxes, and by the period of his

unavailability for employment for any reason.

D. Defendants’ actions and employment and other practices are now, and

have been during the time referred to in the Complaint, conducted in all respects in

accordance with applicable state and federal constitutions, laws, and regulations.

E. Plaintiff’s claims are frivolous or otherwise without merit and

Defendant is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs as a result of having to

defend against such claims.

F. Defendants’ actions towards Plaintiff are solely the result of Plaintiff’s

rejection of the terms and conditions offered to Plaintiff by GCBOCC. Given the

repeated extension of this offer, no further action towards Plaintiff was necessary or

practical and Plaintiff suffered no damages as a result of GCBOCC’s reliance on

Plaintiff’s actions.

8
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 9 of 10

G. Defendants are entitled to a setoff for all collateral sources paid to or

on behalf of Plaintiff herein.

H. Plaintiff's claims and any possible recovery are subject to the

limitations imposed by the applicable statutory damages caps.

I. Plaintiff has failed to adequately plead a basis for attorneys’ fees as

related to any cause of action enumerated in his Complaint. Price v. Tyler, 890 So.

2d 246 (Fla. 2004).

J. Defendants reserve the right to amend their Answer to include

additional defenses and affirmative defenses upon the completion of discovery.

Respectfully submitted.

9
 Case 4:21-cv-00157-RH-MAF Document 7 Filed 05/17/21 Page 10 of 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been

served this 17th day of May, 2021, by electronic mail to counsel for Plaintiff,

Matthew D. MacNamara of SCOTT & WALLACE, LLP, 209 E. Brevard Street,

Tallahassee, Florida 32301 at [email protected]

THE KRIZNER GROUP

s/ Jason C. Taylor
Jason C. Taylor
Florida Bar No. 497525
Email: [email protected]
1550 Village Square Blvd., Suite 3
Tallahassee, FL 32309
Phone: (850) 386-3747
Fax: (850) 907-1246

Attorney for Defendant Gadsden

County Supervisor of Elections and
Brenda Holt, Chairperson of Gadsden
County Board of County
Commissioners

10