A former staffer of the San Francisco District Attorney’s office, Jovan Thomas, has filed a lawsuit against the city following his termination over an inappropriate “reply-all” email.
The incident, which occurred six months ago, involved Thomas mistakenly sending a risqué message intended for a friend to his boss and colleagues. The email, which read, “What colour panties you have on,” was in response to a staff-wide communication from DA Brooke Jenkins.
Misogynistic allegations and termination
The DA’s office condemned the email as “misogynistic behaviour,” leading to an internal review and Thomas’s subsequent firing. Thomas, 56, who has a history of sexual harassment accusations, claims the message was a playful joke intended for a longtime friend whose father had recently died.
In his lawsuit, Thomas asserts that the email had no sexual or inappropriate intent and was merely a non-sequitur intended to cheer up his friend during a difficult time.
“Plaintiff’s flip question had no sexual, off-colour, obscene, misogynistic or sexist meaning or intent,” his lawyers wrote in the filing. “Rather, it was a goofy, non-sequitur by one long-time friend to another friend intended to try to divert and cheer him up while he was going through a difficult and upsetting experience.”
Legal claims and past allegations
Thomas is suing the city for invasion of privacy, defamation, and infliction of severe emotional distress. He is seeking a jury trial and compensatory and punitive damages for his firing. This lawsuit comes after a previous allegation of sexual harassment against Thomas in 2018. A woman, identified as Jane Doe, accused Thomas of making unwanted sexual advances and physical contact while he was working on a case involving her and her son.
Previous lawsuit and case dismissal
The 2018 lawsuit claimed that Thomas stroked the woman’s buttocks and made sexual advances, which she felt compelled to tolerate to receive the victim’s services. In 2019, Jane Doe agreed to drop Thomas from her case against the city. Representatives for the city filed a motion to dismiss the case in 2021, arguing that Thomas’s alleged conduct was outside the scope of his employment. A judge dismissed the case in December of that year.
Seeking justice
Thomas’s recent lawsuit highlights the ongoing debate over workplace conduct and the repercussions of inappropriate behaviour. As he pursues legal action, the case will likely draw significant attention and scrutiny regarding the boundaries of professional and personal interactions in the workplace.
