A US District Court Magistrate Judge has ruled that a race discrimination suit filed by a lieutenant with the Baltimore City Fire Department ought to be dismissed. Lt. Mitchell Waters filed suit in 2023 alleging he was targeted by white officers in the department after he had a “verbal exchange” with a female Baltimore County paramedic whose husband is a city fire officer.
Here is a link to earlier coverage, including a copy of the complaint.
Lt. Waters claims he became the target of race-based “vengeful, false and frivolous” complaints. According to the decision, he cited 12 specific incidents that he was treated differently than his white counter parts. Magistrate Judge A. David Copperthite concluded that even if the facts Lt. Waters alleges were true, it is not sufficient for him to prevail at trial.
Quoting from the decision:
- Of the twelve examples cited by Plaintiff, two of these alleged incidents include circumstances where Plaintiff believes he was discriminated against based on his race and color where “employees outside of Plaintiff’s protected class engaged in more serious misconduct but faced either no disciplinary action or significantly less severe consequences than those imposed on Plaintiff.”
- Plaintiff has offered little supporting evidence for this Court to conclude that the alleged comparators here share significant similarities with Plaintiff.
- However, even if this Court were to find that these incidents establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment under Title VII, Defendant offers a nondiscriminatory reason for the allegedly disparate treatment here.
- Plaintiff’s contention that these examples demonstrate a pattern of disparate treatment is, at best, unclear.
- Defendant convincingly argues that Plaintiff has offered “no evidence” in this case to show that Defendant subjected him “to a different hearing [discipline] process” than that afforded to employees outside of his race and color.
- Accordingly, because Defendant articulates a non-discriminatory reason for the allegedly disparate treatment, and Plaintiff has failed to show that the Defendant’s reasons are pretextual, he fails to meet his evidentiary burden here.
- Other examples cited by Plaintiff… are largely based on Plaintiff’s subjective beliefs, and are altogether insufficient for meeting Plaintiff’s evidentiary burden at summary judgment.
- In sum, Plaintiff fails to meet the required evidentiary burden here, and Defendant is entitled to summary judgment.
- Plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facia case for any of his claims and has not demonstrated that genuine issues of material fact are in dispute here.
- In summary, several of Plaintiff’s complaints revolve around administrative procedures, which Defendant has successfully rebutted. Absent evidence of racial bias, Title VII is not the remedy for procedural defects.
- Plaintiff suggests, without any evidentiary basis other than his own opinions, that race motivated those decisions.
- Plaintiff cannot simply rely on the self-belief of a racially discriminatory motive without evidence to put before a trier of fact.
Here is a copy of the complaint: