W.D. Pa. No. 21-cv-00820
W.D. Pa. No. 21-cv-00820
10 Plaintiff,
COMPLAINT IN CIVIL ACTION
vs.
11 Fed.R.Civ.P. 38(b)(1) Notice of Demand
EXTENDED STAY AMERICA, INC.; for Trial by Jury
12 MATTHEW FIGURSKI in his individual
capacity
13
Defendants.
14
15 COMPLAINT
16 NOW COMES the Plaintiff, Matthew Grinage, aka Kimberly Grinage (“Grinage”) by
17 and through The Trial Law Firm, LLC in compliance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(c) to file the within
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 2 of 23
3 Pennsylvania.
5 Extended Stay is a North Carolina for-profit corporation that advertises and does business in
8 individual who calls himself a “Christian” and conforms to traditional gender roles and
9 expectations, and expects his subordinates to conform to his interpretations of Christianity and
10 gender roles. Figurski is a management level employee of Extended Stay, and at all times
12 4. Grinage brings this lawsuit to redress violations of Title VII. Thereby this court
13 has federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and supplemental jurisdiction
15 5. The events and omissions which give rise to the claims asserted in this lawsuit
17 Therefore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), this district court is the proper venue for this
18 lawsuit.
21 7. Prior to the start of Grinage’s employment with Extended Stay, Grinage applied
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 3 of 23
1 10. Due in part to Figurski’s question in the interview, Grinage did not reveal, and
4 “be yourself.”
5 12. In light of said encouragement, Grinage came to work dressed in attire that is
7 13. Some of Grinage’s co-workers mocked and harassed Grinage for “dressing like
8 a girl.”
9 14. On or about April 10, 2020, Grinage reported the harassment to management,
10 specifically, Figurski. See Exhibit 1, April 10, 2020 Letter (partially reproduced below):
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 4 of 23
10
11
12
13
14
15
16 15. Figurski replied, “Matt, I can’t help you. I don’t want a transgender person here.
19 17. Shortly after Grinage contacted the hotline, Figurski physically cornered
20 Grinage and demanded that the report be retracted if Grinage wanted to remain employed.
21 18. Following Grinage’s hotline report, Figurski harassed Grinage on the basis of
24 crap here.”
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 5 of 23
4 19. Following Grinage’s hotline report, Figurski would demand that Grinage “rate”
6 20. Grinage was visibly uncomfortable when Figurski made these demands, and
7 thereafter, Figurski would state, e.g., “you’re a guy, you are supposed to know when girls are
8 pretty.”
11 b. that “I only hired you because you said you are Christian.”
15 e. “You are a guy not a girl. You need to quit with that. If you continue to
17 22. Grinage stated in response that Figurski was not permitted to terminate
21 25. Upon information and belief, the reason for the termination was that Grinage
22 did not call the police as required to respond to an incident, that people (presumably
23 customers) complained about Grinage’s clothes, and that people complained about Grinage’s
24 mask.
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 6 of 23
1 26. Prior to September 15, 2020, Figurski instructed Grinage to not call the police
2 and/or fire department. On one such occasion, when something was actively on fire, instead of
3 calling firefighters, according to Figurski, Grinage should have put out the fire instead of
6 28. Due to his status as a cancer survivor, Grinage wore a specialized mask rather
7 than a paper or cloth mask most people used due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
8 29. Extended Stay was specifically aware of Grinage’s cancer survivor status and its
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 7 of 23
1 COUNT I
6 32. Grinage was subject to harassment on the basis of sex as discussed in ¶¶ 14, 16,
7 and 19-22.
8 33. Grinage did not welcome the harassment as demonstrated in ¶¶ 15, 17, 21, and
9 23.
12 35. Any reasonable person in Grinage’s position would find Grinage’s work
13 environment to be hostile and abusive, as the harassment was both severe and pervasive.
15 36. Grinage believed the work environment was hostile as demonstrated in ¶ 17.
19 39. As a direct and proximate result of Grinage’s environment, Grinage was injured
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 8 of 23
1 COUNT II
6 41. Grinage engaged in protected activity as demonstrated in ¶¶ 15, 17, and 23.
9 43. The materially adverse actions can be inferred as retaliatory on the non-
12 44. As a direct and proximate result of the materially adverse actions, Grinage was
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 9 of 23
1 COUNT III
3 Wrongful Termination
8 terminate Grinage’s employment as demonstrated in ¶¶ 8, 16, 18, 19(a), 22(a), (d-e), and 23-
9 24.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 10 of 23
1 COUNT IV
3 Wrongful Termination
8 to terminate Grinage’s employment as demonstrated in ¶¶ 8, 16, 18, 19(a), 22(a), (d-e), and 23-
9 24.
10 52. Defendant lied about its reason for terminating Grinage’s employment, as
11 demonstrated in ¶ 27.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 11 of 23
1 COUNT V
3 Wrongful Termination
10 57. Defendant lied about its reason for terminating Grinage’s employment, as
11 demonstrated in ¶ 27.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 12 of 23
1 COUNT VI
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 13 of 23
1 COUNT VII
6 68. Grinage was subject to harassment on the basis of sex as discussed in ¶¶ 14, 16,
7 and 19-22.
8 69. Grinage did not welcome the harassment as demonstrated in ¶¶ 15, 17, 21, and
9 23.
12 71. Any reasonable person in Grinage’s position would find Grinage’s work
13 environment to be hostile and abusive, as the harassment was both severe and pervasive.
15 72. Grinage believed the work environment was hostile as demonstrated in ¶ 17.
19 75. As a direct and proximate result of Grinage’s environment, Grinage was injured
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 14 of 23
1 COUNT VIII
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 15 of 23
1 COUNT IX
3 Wrongful Termination
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 16 of 23
1 COUNT X
3 Wrongful Termination
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 17 of 23
1 COUNT XI
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 18 of 23
1 COUNT XII
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 19 of 23
1 COUNT XIII
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 20 of 23
1 COUNT XIV
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 21 of 23
1 conform to gender roles as Figurski understood them, as they were open, obvious, and
3 122. Extended Stay breached its duty and responsibility of care when, despite being
7 Figurski was able to discriminate against, detain, and assault Grinage as described in this
8 lawsuit.
9 124. As a direct and proximate result of Extended Stay’s breach as described in this
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 22 of 23
1 COUNT XV
23
24
25
26
Case 2:21-cv-00820-CB Document 1 Filed 06/24/21 Page 23 of 23
2 requests Judgment against Extended Stay America, Inc. and Matthew Figurski, jointly and
4 damages to include emotional damages, humiliation, embarrassment, pain and suffering, and
5 loss of enjoyment of life, as well as punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and cost of suit.
8
By: ________________________
9
Mart Harris, Esquire
Trial Lawyer for Grinage
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26