SAN FRANCISCO — A former Lake County Sheriff”s (LCSO) deputy is set to face the county in court starting next week after suing for alleged racial discrimination against him.
Trial proceedings in the case of Michael D. Morshed, who worked for the LCSO as a deputy and a seargent from 1990 to 2010, are scheduled to begin on Monday at 8:30 a.m. at the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco. Morshed, or Iranian origin, filed the lawsuit on Feb. 5 2012
Trial comes after United States District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granted two out of three requests to strike the allegations as part of a summary judgment motion presented by the Lake County attorneys, according to court documents.
“The court finds that only the claims basied upon the existence of a hostile work environment, due to evidence of national origin harassment, raise a triable issue of fact,” Gonzalez Rogers wrote in her ruling.
In his initial complaint, Morshed alleged the LCSO discriminated against him on the basis of his Iranian Origin, was subjected to a hostile work environment through racially derogatory comments, was denied the opportunity to a promotion because of his nationality and that he faced retaliation after filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOP).
On the harassment on the basis of nationality issue, the court did not find merit to strike the complaint.
“The court cannot say, as a matter of law, that the conduct described by the plaintiff is not sufficiently severe and pervasive, both objectively and subjectively, to constitute a hostile work environment,” the ruling stated.
According to the document, Morshed has to establish that “(1) he was subjected to verbal or physical conduct [because of national origin]; (2) the conduct was unwelcome and (3) the conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the plaintiff”s employment and create an abusive work environment.”
Morshed alleged the LCSO “participated in creating and maintaining a hostile work environment and failed to investigate, stop or prevent incidents of national origin harassment” after he gave notice of the incidents.
He also claimed that three superiors, Sgt. Chris Macedo (now interim undersheriff) and lieutenants Gary Hall and David Garzoli, made discriminatory comments and emailed him links to derogatory or offensive material, including at least one video.
In the document, the county states that all witnesses deposed by Morshed denied the incidents.
The county also argued that the alleged slurs were made by coworkers and that Morshed never made a complaint, Gonzalez Rogers” ruling states, and that liability cannot be shown on the basis that a supervisor witnessed the comments.
“Though the plaintiff did not complain about the conduct, he offers evidence that supervisors witnessed and participated in the conduct, so that he believed that the conduct was just accepted in the sheriff”s department and he should not say anything if he wanted to keep his job.”
The judge sided with the county on the issue of Morshed not being allowed a promotion from deputy to sergeant because of his origin.
“Plaintiff has failed to offer evidence to create a triable issue on the prima facie element of his discrimination in promotion claim.”
In September of 2006, Morshed admitted to having sexual relations with a county employee while on duty and in uniform, the document stated. He was demoted as a result of an internal affairs investigation.
Morshed alleged that he was kept from taking a promotional exam because of his national origin.
According to the court documents, in December 2007 Morshed was dispatched to an assault with injuries with a possible gun involvement. After the incident, he prepared a report for simple battery because he did not deem it worthy of a more serious report. As a result, an internal affairs investigation found he did not prepare an appropriate report and ruled that he violated rules and regulations and neglected his duties.
During his annual evaluation, Morshed scored the lowest out of nine participants, the report stated.
The court also sided with the county regarding Morshed”s retaliation claims.
“Plaintiff has failed to offer evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer that his termination was on account of retaliation for his protected complaints,” Gonzalez Rogers stated.
Morshed alleged he faced retaliation after speaking to a county investigator and submitting the EEOC charge. He stated he was denied overtime, his time cards were scrutinized, was subject of unwarranted internal affairs investigations and was ultimately terminated from his job.
“Most of the conduct plaintiff cites does not amount to an adverse action on its own,” the document stated.
“The overtime he was initially denied were granted once he pointed out the error,” the document adds.
In the document, the court states that it does not find that the investigations into Morshed are fueled by discrimination, but a result of reasonable suspicion.
Furthermore, Gonzalez Rogers stated that a causal chain was broken by the fact that Morshed refused to cooperate in the criminal investigation of stolen computer files, of which Morshed was reportedly “one of a handful of people who had accessed the document and was a suspect.” He also allegedly accessed the document twice during the relevant time period while a thumb drive was inserted in the computer, the document stated.
Morshed refused to cooperate “despite a lybarger admonition warning him that failure to cooperate would be considered insubordination and grounds for termination,” the document adds.
Regarding the allegations, the county has denied any wrongdoing by the LCSO.
The two sides are scheduled to begin trial on Monday.
Isaac Brambila is an associate editor for Lake County Publishing. Reach him at 900-2020 or at ibrambila@record-bee.com.
