Richard L. Smith, Jr. v. Reliant Gaming Specialist, L.L.C.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CRAIG COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA RICHARD L. SMITH, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) vs. ) RELIANT GAMING SPECIALIST, L.L.C., ) Defendant. ) BY A. Hayes Case No. CJ-21e-43 PETITION COMES NOW the Plaintiff Richard L. Smith, Jr., and in support of his petition against the Defendant would allege and state as follows: 1. The Plaintiff Richard L. Smith is sixty-eight years old and is a resident of Sequoyah County, State of Oklahoma. 2. Defendant Reliant Gaming Specialist, L.L.C., is a domestic corporation with a principal place of business in Vinita, Craig County, Oklahoma. 3. That at all times pertinent to this action, the employees of Defendant were acting in the course and scope of their employment by and in furtherance of the interests of Defendant. 4. This action concerns Defendant’s wrongful termination and related causes of action under both federal and state law, thus venue and jurisdiction are appropriate. 5. Defendant Reliant Gaming Specialist, LLC is a company that specializes in the building and refurbishment of slot machine chairs used in gambling establishments. 6. Shannon Bassett was the Chief Executive Officer of Defendant. 7. Plaintiff had known Shannon Bassett professionally for over 20 years. 8. Shannon Bassett actively recruited Plaintiff for the position of General Manager with Defendant. 9. Plaintiff did not independently seek employment with Defendant but was solicited by Shannon Bassett based on his extensive experience and leadership background. 10. Shannon Bassett expressed profound trust in Plaintiff's capabilities and integrity. 11. Shannon Bassett's intent in recruiting Plaintiff was to ensure the stability and future of her company and her children's legacy. 12. Plaintiff was hired by Defendant on March 10, 2025, in the role of General Manager. 13. During his employment, Plaintiff demonstrated a willingness to contribute meaningfully to Defendant's operations. 14. Plaintiff expressed willingness to step beyond the confines of his assigned role in order to better understand all operational positions within the business. 15. At no time prior to termination was Plaintiff informed that his conduct allegedly made staff uncomfortable. 16. Plaintiff was never counseled, warned, disciplined, or provided an opportunity to address any purported concerns regarding his performance or behavior. 17. Defendant produced no contemporaneous documentation reflecting complaints, investigations, or corrective action during Plaintiff's employment. 18. On March 20, 2025, during a team lunch, an incident occurred involving Plaintiff and Molly Bassett, an employee of Defendant. 19. During this incident, Molly Bassett referred to Plaintiff as "an old man that doesn't know shit." 20. On March 21 2025, Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment after only ten days. 21. Defendant's stated reasons for termination included allegations that Plaintiff failed to engage with the company's leadership team, failed to actively contribute to management discussions, and failed to demonstrate leadership, communication, and professional judgment. 22. These stated reasons are contradicted by contemporaneous communications showing Plaintiff's proactive efforts and willingness to contribute. 23. The absence of any prior discipline, counseling, or corrective action before termination demonstrates that Defendant's stated reasons are pretextual. 24. Multiple individuals with firsthand knowledge were present at relevant meetings and during pertinent circumstances and can provide testimony corroborating Plaintiff's professional conduct and contributions. 25. Shannon Bassett passed away on October 18, 2025. 26. Following his termination, Plaintiff has suffered significant financial hardship. 27. This financial hardship is a direct result of Plaintiff's wrongful termination. 28. On April 10, 2025, Plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Charge Number 564-2025-01793, alleging age discrimination. 29. On January 30, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued a Notice of Right to Sue to Plaintiff. 30. Plaintiff received the Notice of Right to Sue on or about January 30, 2026. 31. This action is filed within 90 days of Plaintiff's receipt of the Notice of Right to Sue. Cause of Action No. I - Age Discrimination (ADEA) 32. Plaintiff adopts and realleges the allegations set forth in previous paragraphs. 33. Plaintiff was a member of the protected class under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. 34. Plaintiff was qualified for the position of General Manager. 35. Plaintiff was hired into a senior leadership role, demonstrating that Defendant considered him qualified for the position. 36. Defendant terminated Plaintiff’s employment on March 20, 2025. 37. The adverse employment action occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination based on age. 38. Defendant’s actions, through its employee, constitutes direct evidence of age-based animus. 39. Defendant's stated reasons for termination are pretextual. 40. Plaintiff’s termination after only ten days of employment, despite being actively recruited based on extensive experience, further supports an inference that age was the motivating factor. 41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful age discrimination, Plaintiff has suffered damages including lost wages, lost benefits, emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, and financial hardship. Cause of Action No. I - Age Discrimination (OADA) 42. Plaintiff adopts and realleges the allegations set forth in previous paragraphs. 43. Defendant engaged in unlawful age discrimination under Oklahoma Law. 44. The true reason for Plaintiff's termination was his age. 45. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful age discrimination, Plaintiff has suffered damages including lost wages, lost benefits, emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, and financial hardship. Cause of Action No. III – Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy 46. Plaintiff adopts and realleges the allegations set forth in previous paragraphs. 47. Plaintiff’s discharge was in violation of a clearly established public policy of the State of Oklahoma. 48. Oklahoma has a clearly established public policy against age discrimination in employment. 49. Plaintiff’s discharge violated this clearly established public policy because it was based on his age. 50. As a direct and proximate result of his wrongful discharge, Plaintiff has suffered damages including lost wages, lost benefits, emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, and financial hardship. Cause of Action No. IV – Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 51. Plaintiff adopts and realleges the allegations set forth in previous paragraphs. 52. Defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous. 53. After only ten days of employment, Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment. 54. On the day of termination, Molly Bassett, an employee of Defendant, referred to Plaintiff as "an old man that doesn't know shit." 55. Defendant allowed this age-based comment to be made in the workplace without taking adequate corrective action to prevent the termination based on age-related animus. 56. Defendant terminated Plaintiff based on pretextual reasons that were contradicted by contemporaneous evidence of Plaintiff's proactive efforts and contributions. 57. The combination of active recruitment, expression of profound trust, allowance of age-based comments, and abrupt termination after only ten days based on pretextual reasons constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct. 58. Defendant acted with intent to cause emotional distress or with reckless disregard for the probability of causing emotional distress. 59. Defendant knew or should have known that terminating Plaintiff after only ten days of employment, following active recruitment and expressions of trust, would cause severe emotional distress. 60. Defendant knew or should have known that allowing age-based comments in the workplace and terminating Plaintiff based on age-related animus would cause severe emotional distress. 61. As a result of Defendant's conduct, Plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress, including humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety, and mental anguish. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in his favor and against Defendant as follows: 1. Compensatory damages against Defendant for lost wages, salary, and benefits from the date of termination, March 20, 2025, through the date of trial or settlement, in an amount to be determined at trial. 2. Compensatory damages against Defendant for emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, and mental anguish in an amount to be determined at trial. 3. Compensatory damages against Defendant for financial hardship resulting from the loss of employment. 4. Front pay against Defendant for future lost wages and benefits in an amount to be determined at trial. 5. Punitive damages against Defendant in an amount to be determined at trial. 6. Liquidated damages against Defendant pursuant to Recordkeeping, investigation, and enforcement for willful violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. 7. Reasonable attorney's fees and costs of this action against Defendant pursuant to Recordkeeping, investigation, and enforcement and applicable Oklahoma law. 8. Pre-judgment interest against Defendant at the statutory rate from the date of termination until the date of judgment. 9. Post-judgment interest against Defendant at the statutory rate from the date of judgment until the judgment is satisfied. 10. Reinstatement of Plaintiff to his former position as General Manager or to a substantially equivalent position, or in the alternative, front pay. 11. A declaratory judgment that Defendant's conduct violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Oklahoma Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and that Defendant's stated reasons for termination were pretextual. 12. Injunctive relief requiring Defendant to cease discriminatory conduct and to implement policies and procedures to prevent future age discrimination in the workplace. 13. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. RICHARD L. SMITH, JR., PLAINTIFF By: __________________________ RICHARD L. SMITH, JR. ADDRESS PHONE EMAIL STATEMENT UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY I, the undersigned state under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of Oklahoma, that the foregoing is true and correct. 04/30/2026 (Date) RICHARD L. SMITH, JR. DETERMINATION AND NOTICE OF RIGHTS (This Notice replaces EEOC FORMS 161, 161-A & 161-B) Issued On: 01/30/2026 To: Mr. Richard L. Smith Jr. PO Box 96 GORE, OK 74435 Charge No: 564-2025-01793 EEOC Representative and email: ANTHONY WIECHEC EQUAL OPPORTUNITY INVESTIGATOR [email protected] DETERMINATION AND NOTICE OF RIGHTS The EEOC issues the following determination: The EEOC will not proceed further with its investigation and makes no determination about whether further investigation would establish violations of the statute. This does not mean the claims have no merit. This determination does not certify that the respondent is in compliance with the statutes. The EEOC makes no finding as to the merits of any other issues that might be construed as having been raised by this charge. NOTICE OF YOUR RIGHT TO SUE This is official notice that the EEOC has dismissed your charge and has issued you notice of your right to sue the respondent(s) on this charge. If you choose to file a lawsuit against the respondent(s) on this charge under federal law in federal or state court, your lawsuit must be filed WITHIN 90 DAYS of your receipt of EEOC’s official notice of dismissal. You should keep a record of the date you received the EEOC’s official notice of dismissal. Your right to sue based on this charge will be lost if you do not file a lawsuit in court within 90 days. (The time limit for filing a lawsuit based on a claim under state law may be different.) If you file a lawsuit based on this charge, please sign-in to the EEOC Public Portal and upload the court complaint to charge 564-2025-01793. On behalf of the Commission, Digitally Signed By:Holly Waldron Cole 01/30/2026 Holly Waldron Cole Area Office Director Cc: Linda Lucas Reliant Gaming Specialist LLC 702 N Wilson St Vinita, OK 74301 Mark McAlester Fenton, Fenton, Smith, Reneau, & Moon, P.C. 211 N Robinson - Suite 800 Oklahoma City, OK 73102 Shannon Bassett Reliant Gaming Specialist LLC PO Box 557 Vinita, OK 74301 NA NA Reliant Gaming Specialist, L.L.C. PO BOX 557 VINITA, OK 74301 Please retain this Notice for your records.