A federal magistrate judge has recommended that summary judgment be granted in favor of Douglas County, Georgia, in a lawsuit filed by former Fire Chief/EMS Director Roderick B. Jolivette, who alleged that the county discriminated against him because of his race and retaliated against him after he complained of discrimination and filed an EEOC charge.

Chief Jolivette, an African American, was hired in January 2021 as Douglas County’s Fire Chief/EMS Director. According to the court, he was the first Black fire chief to lead the department. Before joining Douglas County, he had approximately 35 years of fire service experience in Georgia and held both bachelor’s and master’s degrees.

Quoting from the decision:

• Plaintiff has a history of filing discrimination lawsuits and administrative charges.
• Between 2003-2006, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the City of Albany for racial discrimination and retaliation based on an alleged failure to train, failure to promote, and hostile work environment.
• In or around 2005, Plaintiff filed an EEOC [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] charge of discrimination against Dougherty County for racial discrimination and retaliation. Between 2009-2010, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the City of Albany for racial discrimination and retaliation based on an alleged failure to promote and hostile work environment.
• Between 2014-2018, Plaintiff filed an EEOC charge of discrimination against the City of Tifton for racial discrimination based on an alleged failure to hire
• In or around 2019, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the City of Americus for racial discrimination based on an alleged failure to hire…
• At the time Plaintiff was first hired, the Fire Department employees were predominantly white.
• Plaintiff sought to create and maintain a racially diverse staff, and he implemented a policy to diversify the Fire Department to reflect the diverse community of Douglas County, which included hiring more qualified Black firefighters.
• Plaintiff learned that many firefighters resented Plaintiff’s diversity efforts, and some left the Fire Department.
• At some point, a confederate sign was found in the station bay area by a Black deputy chief.
• White officers stated that they would rather leave than work under the Black management, and also that a Black deputy chief got the position only because he was Black.
• Some white firefighters called a Black firefighter stupid and uneducated, and asked if he was on medication because that would explain why he could never learn anything. Some white firefighters stated that Plaintiff was too dumb to lead the Fire Department, and also drew on a picture to depict Plaintiff as the devil, which was placed in the department bathroom.
• On December 12, 2022, Commissioner Mark Alcarez instructed Plaintiff to terminate Officer Gabby Armstrong, a Black female, for alleged marijuana use, but Plaintiff did not do so because there was no evidence of her alleged marijuana use, and the Board of Commissioners did not direct personnel matters

The events leading to the litigation centered on firefighter Daymetrie Williams. In January 2023, county officials learned that Williams was the subject of an active arrest warrant stemming from a felony theft-by-deception case in Alabama. The Board of Commissioners directed Chief Jolivette to investigate Williams’ warrant and criminal history to determine whether termination was appropriate because Williams allegedly failed to disclose the matter during the hiring process.

Chief Jolivette contacted court officials in Alabama but was unable to obtain information regarding the warrant. The court found that after that initial effort he took no further investigative steps, prompting county officials to direct him to conduct a more complete investigation and provide both a written report and all supporting documentation.

Chief Jolivette submitted a written report on February 18, 2023. According to the court, the report focused primarily on media coverage and potential legal issues surrounding Williams’ employment rather than the requested factual investigation. The report acknowledged that the department’s Chief Investigator had obtained an updated criminal background check, but that background check was not provided to county leadership.

On February 23, 2023, Chief Jolivette filed a race discrimination complaint with the EEOC. This followed prior internal complaints of race discrimination he made to local officials in December 2022, January 2023, and February 2023. On February 24, 2023, he was placed on paid administrative leave while the county conducted its own investigation into what the court stated was Chief Jolivette’s “inadequate investigation” into Williams.

The court noted that the leave was not disciplinary in nature. During that investigation, county officials determined that the Chief Investigator had prepared a report confirming Williams’ arrest warrant and criminal history under Chief Jolivette’s direction, but that report had never been submitted to county leadership. Investigators also located Williams’ personnel file in Chief Jolivette’s locked file cabinet after it had previously been reported missing.

The county terminated Chief Jolivette’s employment on May 1, 2023, citing failure to comply with county policy, failure to follow orders, and failure to adequately complete assigned work. His replacement was also an African American male.

Chief Jolivette alleged that his termination was motivated by race and in retaliation for complaints he made to county officials concerning alleged discrimination, including his refusal to terminate a Black firefighter based on an unsupported allegation of marijuana use and his later EEOC charge.

The magistrate judge concluded that the evidence did not support either claim.

With respect to the race discrimination claim under Title VII, the court found that Chief Jolivette lacked evidence that similarly situated white employees were treated more favorably. The court therefore evaluated the claim under the Eleventh Circuit’s “convincing mosaic” framework but concluded that the evidence did not permit a reasonable inference of intentional race discrimination. The court acknowledged evidence of racial tension within the department but found no evidence that the County Administrator or Board of Commissioners—the individuals responsible for the termination decision—acted with racial animus.

The court also rejected Chief Jolivette’s argument that the county’s stated reasons for his termination were pretextual. According to the recommendation, the undisputed evidence showed that he had been directed to investigate Williams’ criminal history, prepare a report, and submit supporting documentation, but failed to do so. The court emphasized that an employee cannot establish pretext merely by disagreeing with the employer’s assessment of his performance or the wisdom of its decision.

The magistrate judge recommended dismissal of the §1981 race discrimination claim as well, concluding that the claim had effectively been abandoned because Chief Jolivette did not respond to the county’s legal arguments. The recommendation also noted that claims against a county under §1981 must generally proceed through 42 U.S.C. §1983.

The retaliation claim met a similar fate. Although the court found that the approximately two-month period between Chief Jolivette’s EEOC charge and his termination was sufficiently close in time to satisfy the initial causal connection requirement, it held that temporal proximity alone was insufficient to establish retaliation where the county had articulated legitimate reasons for the termination and the plaintiff failed to produce evidence showing those reasons were pretextual. The court concluded that there was no evidence that, but for the protected activity, Chief Jolivette would not have been terminated.

The magistrate judge also denied Chief Jolivette’s motion for leave to file a sur-reply and recommended that summary judgment be entered in favor of Douglas County on all claims.