Chabot v. Cnty. of Rockland

• Decision Date: 25 July 2019
• Docket Number: No. 18-CV-4109 (KMK),18-CV-4109 (KMK)
• Parties: JOSEPH CHABOT, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF ROCKLAND, NEW YORK; BOARD OF ELECTIONS IN THE COUNTY OF ROCKLAND; PATRICIA GIBLIN, in her official and individual capacity; KRISTEN ZEBROWSKI STAVISKY, in her official capacity; and John and Jane Does 1-5, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

JOSEPH CHABOT, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF ROCKLAND, NEW YORK; BOARD OF ELECTIONS IN THE COUNTY OF ROCKLAND;

PATRICIA GIBLIN, in her official and individual capacity; KRISTEN ZEBROWSKI STAVISKY, in her official capacity;

and John and Jane Does 1-5, Defendants.

No. 18-CV-4109 (KMK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

July 25, 2019

OPINION & ORDER

Appearances:

John G. Stepanovich, Esq.

Stepanovich Law P.L.C.

Virginia Beach, VA

Counsel for Plaintiff

Matthew G. Parisi, Esq.

Bleakley Platt & Schmidt, LLP

White Plains, NY

Counsel for Defendant County of Rockland

Jarrett M. Behar, Esq.

Sinnreich Kosakoff & Messina LLP

Central Islip, NY

Counsel for Defendant Patricia Giblin

Lisa A. Perillo, Esq.

Forchelli, Deegan & Terrana LLP

Uniondale, NY

Counsel for Defendant Patricia Giblin

Daniel S. H. Szalkiewicz, Esq.

Faga Savino, LLP

White Plains, NY

Counsel for Defendants Board of Elections for the County of Rockland and Kristen Zebrowski Stavisky

KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge:

Plaintiff Joseph Chabot ("Plaintiff") brings this Action against the County of Rockland, New York (the "County"), the Board of Elections for the County of Rockland ("BOE"), BOE Commissioner Patricia Giblin ("Giblin"), and BOE Commissioner Kristen Zebrowski Stavisky ("Stavisky") (collectively "Defendants"), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants retaliated against him by terminating his employment in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and New York state constitutional and election law. (See Second Am. Compl. ("SAC") (Dkt. No. 55).)¹ Before the Court are Defendants' Motions To Dismiss. (County Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 64); Giblin Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 71).) For the following reasons, Defendants' Motions are granted in part and denied in part.

I. Background

A. Factual Background

The facts recounted below are taken from Plaintiff's SAC and are assumed to be true for purposes of resolving the Motions.

1. Plaintiff's Employment

At all relevant times, Plaintiff was employed as a "Clerk III employee, a Republican," with the BOE. (SAC ¶ 10.) The BOE consists of two Commissioners. (Id. ¶ 18.) Plaintiff was hired by BOE in November 2014. (Id. ¶ 38.) He began his employment at the BOE in the capacity of a Clerk III with the consent of BOE Commissioner Stavisky, a registered DemocraticParty Member, and former BOE Commissioner Louis C. Babcock, a registered Republican Party Member. (Id.)

When Rockland County Executive Edwin J. Day ("Day") took control of the Republican Party, former BOE Commissioner Babcock was not reelected. Giblin, a registered Republican Party Member and "political operative of . . . Day," was elected as a BOE Commissioner. (SAC ¶ 39.) Plaintiff alleges Giblin's appointment as Commissioner was approved by Day. (Id. ¶ 13.) Plaintiff further alleges Day hand picked Giblin as the Republican Commissioner to facilitate his partisan control of the Republican positions on the BOE and to allow him to employ at BOE only people who are politically loyal to him. (Id. ¶ 86.)

Plaintiff alleges that Clerk III positions are not policy-making employment positions, (id. ¶ 11), but rather "the lowest level of employment at the BOE, and involve exercising no discretionary duties at the BOE," (id. ¶ 40). Plaintiff further alleges that as a Clerk III employee he did not make rulings on any petitions, decide whether anyone was entitled to be on the ballot, or undertake any other actions that establish BOE policy. (Id. ¶ 45.) Plaintiff's duties as Clerk III were allegedly "solely ministerial," and included answering telephones, greeting people coming into the BOE office, assisting with voter registration by accepting registration forms, receiving absentee forms, taking in and sending out mail, and entering data from registration forms into BOE files. (Id. ¶ 41.) Plaintiff also distributed approved election and/or voter information to the general public and registration forms to high school classes. (Id. ¶¶ 42-43.) Plaintiff did so in a "bipartisan manner and according to the authorization and direction of the Defendant BOE, and only in the company of the other Clerk III BOE employee aligned with the opposing political party," (id. ¶ 43), to insure bipartisan conduct at the BOE, (id. ¶ 42). Finally, Plaintiff handled a variety of election and voter-related documents for the BOE. (Id. ¶ 44.)Whenever Plaintiff handled documents requiring a determination of the BOE, he provided such document in a bi-partisan manner to the two BOE Commissioners, and only the Commissioners, not employees in the Clerk III position, could make those determinations. (Id.)

Outside of work, Plaintiff actively participated in the Rockland County Republican Party (the "Party"). (SAC ¶ 22.) Plaintiff associated with the Party with the active encouragement of former Republican Party Chairperson, Vincent Reda ("Reda"), (id. ¶ 23), who was involved in New York statewide Republican activities, (id. ¶ 24). Reda introduced Plaintiff to influential Republicans in Rockland and Westchester Counties and throughout New York. (Id. ¶ 25.) Plaintiff alleges he was willing to work with the Democratic Party and other Parties to help the Republican Party carry out its political platform in Rockland County, and that he was willing to do so in "fairness to all Rockland County Residents and [with] equal respect to all people without regard to race or religion." (Id. ¶ 26.)

2. County Policy Regarding the Orthodox and Hasidic Jewish Community

Plaintiff alleges that in response to the growth of the Orthodox and Hasidic Jewish community (the "Religious Community") in Rockland County, Day and Giblin, whom Plaintiff alleges was Day's "political protégé," adopted the practice and policy of opposing the expansion of the Religious Community within the County. (SAC ¶¶ 28-29.) Plaintiff alleges that "Day, and his Administration . . . admitted a goal and implemented a custom, policy and practice to limit and suppress the growth of the Religious Community . . . and discipline[ed] those, such as Plaintiff," who did not oppose the growth of the Religious Community. (Id. ¶ 30.)

Plaintiff alleges that Day advised a former Rockland County Department Head that he or she should be careful not to give too much money in the Town of Ramapo as that would allow for this Religious Community to "continue growing." (Id. ¶ 31.) Plaintiff alleges that theDeputy County Executive appointed by Day also advised that same Department Head with respect to the Religious Community, stating, "[w]e can't stop them, but we can and must try to slow their growth down." (Id. ¶ 32.)

Plaintiff alleges that "any association with, or failure to speak against that Religious Community by Plaintiff caused [] Defendants . . . to consider him as someone to be removed from any position within County government or even within the Party." (SAC ¶ 33.) Plaintiff further alleges that by "speaking out and not acting or advising of any intention to suppress this Religious Community was acting contrary to the custom, practice and policy of [] Defendants." (Id. ¶ 34.) Plaintiff alleges that he became a "'sacrificial lamb' that Day could offer up as an example to others who did not follow his lead on this issue." (Id.)

3. Plaintiff Seeks Public Office

In 2013, Day allegedly orchestrated efforts to have his "hand-picked operative," Lawrence Garvey ("Garvey"), replace former Party Chair Reda as the Rockland County Republican Party Chairperson. (SAC ¶ 35.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendants acted against him because of his association with Reda. (Id. ¶ 37.)

In late 2015, Plaintiff sought election as a candidate in the Republican Party as a Member of the New York State Assembly for the 97th Assembly District. (Id. ¶ 49.) As part of that effort, Plaintiff sought professional advice regarding public communications and campaign strategy. (Id. ¶ 50.) Republican Party Chair, Garvey, advised Plaintiff to hire the Casale Group for campaign communications and strategy. (Id. ¶ 51.)

On February 11 , 2016, at the urging of Garvey, Plaintiff signed an agreement for campaign communication and strategy advice with the Casale Group. (Id. ¶ 52.) Plaintiff alleges that he paid considerable sums of money to the Casale Group, but that the Casale Groupfailed to provide the guidance and strategy that Plaintiff needed. (Id. ¶ 53.) Plaintiff had limited means to continue to employ the Casale Group. (Id. ¶ 54.) In March 2016, Plaintiff terminated his relationship with the Casale Group. Thereafter, Garvey immediately advised Plaintiff that his termination of the Casale Group had "extremely displeased" Day. (Id. ¶ 55.)

Subsequently, Plaintiff hired Katie Beckmann to provide campaign advice. (SAC ¶ 56.) At the time Plaintiff hired Katie Beckmann, William Beckmann, her father, headed the Rockland County Conservative Party. (Id. ¶ 57.) Plaintiff alleges that Garvey "greatly disapproved" of Plaintiff's decision to hire Katie Beckmann. (Id. ¶ 58.) Garvey advised Plaintiff that he could not use Katie Beckman as a consultant because she was someone currently out of favor with the Party. (Id. ¶ 59.) Plaintiff alleges that his association with Katie Beckmann was the cause of "Plaintiff's disfavor with Defendants." (Id. ¶ 60.) Plaintiff alleges that his association with Reda and his hiring of Katie Beckmann caused Day to take "hostile actions" against Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 61.)

4. Call from a "Fake Rabbi"

Shortly before the November 2016 Election, Plaintiff received a telephone call from an individual who was allegedly falsely claiming to represent a certain Jewish religious group. (SAC ¶ 62.) The person claimed to be a Rabbi. (Id. ¶ 63.) The "Rabbi" asked Plaintiff about his position on various issues, including regulation of schools and housing for Orthodox and Hasidic Jews. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges that the issues he discussed with the "Rabbi" were central to the Day Administration's attempt to suppress the growth of the Orthodox and Hasidic communities in Rockland County. (Id. ¶ 64.)

Soon...