Discrimination lawsuit against sheriff moves toward dismissal

Aug. 31—An employee's discrimination lawsuit against Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins appears headed toward dismissal after more than two years.

Sgt. Amanda Ensor, who joined the sheriff's office in 2002 as a deputy, accused Jenkins and other FCSO supervisors of gender-based discrimination in the lawsuit filed May 20, 2020. Frederick County and the Frederick County Sheriff's Office were also named as defendants.

The supervisors — except Jenkins — and the sheriff's office as an agency have since been dismissed from the suit, online court records show.

Jenkins last year denied the gender discrimination allegations.

After years of filing motions back and forth in court, a stipulation of dismissal was entered into online court records on Aug. 17, 2022.

It reads, "... the Parties hereby jointly stipulate to the dismissal with prejudice of all claims asserted by plaintiff Amanda J. Ensor against defendants Sheriff Charles A. Jenkins and Frederick County, Maryland. No claims remain pending in this matter. A proposed order is attached."

The document contains names of the attorneys representing Ensor, the county and Jenkins. A judge had not signed the proposed order as of Tuesday.

The Maryland Attorney General's Office, representing Jenkins, said in an email Tuesday that it does not comment on ongoing litigation. Attorney Janice Rockwell, representing Ensor, did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday.

Attorney Kevin Karpinski, representing Frederick County, said in an interview Tuesday the county did not actively participate in the settlement discussion. He said that occurred between the other parties, and that the county has been dismissed.

What was alleged

In May 2020, Ensor alleged in the lawsuit that Jenkins does not believe women should be in supervisory positions and that he spoke about women in a derogatory way.

"The sense of culture, coming from the top down, that pervades FCSO is one of discriminatory animus toward multiple protected characteristics, including sex," the complaint reads.

Ensor alleged she was unfairly disciplined after participating in a prank arrest video in September 2018. Court documents state the video was not approved in advance by the sheriff's office.

As a result, Ensor was suspended without pay for 15 work days, lost her take-home vehicle for 30 work days and was transferred from patrol to judicial services, court documents show.

In the complaint, Ensor also alleged her medical leave rights were violated.

An internal investigation into Ensor's conduct began after the prank arrest video, according to court documents. While Ensor was on medical leave for a surgery, she said, she was ordered to come in to work for interrogation in 2018, the lawsuit reads.

Then, in March 2020, Ensor reportedly took leave for another surgery. In the complaint, she alleges her request to return to work on "restricted duty" was unfairly denied, forcing her to use sick leave.

Ensor, through the lawsuit, sought more than $600,000 in relief.

In more recent court filings, Jenkins' counsel argued Ensor lacks standing to pursue the discrimination case because she filed for bankruptcy.

Ensor filed a voluntary petition for bankruptcy under Chapter 13 in April 2017, records attached to court documents show.

The bankruptcy case was active when she filed a charge of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in March 2019, according to court filings. The bankruptcy case is still active.

Ensor failed to disclose the discrimination claim to the bankruptcy court, court documents state.

"Every action Sgt. Ensor has taken in this employment litigation has occurred while her Chapter 13 bankruptcy case was pending. Because the legal claims are the exclusive property of the bankruptcy estate, she is not the real party in interest and cannot pursue this case," the counsel for Jenkins wrote in the April 26, 2022, motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ensor did not tell Rockwell she had filed for bankruptcy, "not realizing it was relevant," Rockwell wrote in response to Jenkins' motion. Her bankruptcy attorney, Stephen A. Glessner, was also not informed of the discrimination case, "simply because [Ensor] did not know that was appropriate," court documents state.

Ensor subsequently updated her bankruptcy filing to list the discrimination claim.

"Neither my bankruptcy attorney nor my attorney for my discrimination claim knew about the other, to the best of my knowledge, until they were recently contacted by counsel for Sheriff Jenkins," Ensor wrote in court documents filed May 10, 2022.

Court records as of Tuesday did not indicate when the judge might sign the dismissal.

Follow Mary Grace Keller on Twitter:

@MaryGraceKeller