Frederick v. State
| Decision Date | 27 March 2020 |
| Docket Number | 6:16-CV-06570 EAW |
| Citation | 449 F.Supp.3d 115 |
| Parties | Joel W. FREDERICK, Plaintiff, v. STATE of New York, Office of Mental Health, Rochester Psychiatric Center, Colomba Misseritti, Director of Human Resource Management, Joseph Coffey, Director of Facility Administration, Doug Lee, Associate Personnel Administrator, John Burrows, Bureau of Employee Relations Representative, Phillip Griffin, Executive Director, Dr. Guttmacher, Clinical Director, Sgt. David Reed, Safety Department Representative, Tim Coles, Maintenance Supervisor II, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of New York |
Ryan Charles Woodworth, Woodworth Law Firm, Rochester, NY, for Plaintiff.
Gary M. Levine, New York State Office of the Attorney General, Rochester, NY, for Defendants.
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Joel W. Frederick ("Plaintiff") raises a series of claims arising from his employment with Defendant Rochester Psychiatric Center ("RPC"), including from a mental hygiene arrest1 that was effected based upon the representations of several RPC employees. Plaintiff alleges violations of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Rehabilitation Act"), 29 U.S.C. § 794, for discriminatory treatment due to a perceived disability and retaliation for opposing discrimination based on that perceived disability; New York Labor Law § 740 ; and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for alleged deprivation of his federal constitutional rights by state employees, including retaliation against him for exercising his First Amendment rights, false arrest and imprisonment, and abuse of process. (Dkt. 2 at 2). Presently before the Court is Defendants' motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. 40). For the following reasons, Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Plaintiff began working for the New York State Office of Mental Health ("OMH") at the RPC as a general mechanic in May of 2011, and remains employed in that same capacity. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 1-2; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 1-2). Plaintiff described his mechanic duties as "general maintenance," including "work[ing] on locks," "painting, plumbing, drywall work, doors, hardware, framing,...carpentry[,] or mechanical repairs." (Dkt. 40-3 at 22).
On August 8, 2015, Plaintiff was involved in an incident with his supervisor, Ron Germain ("Germain"). Plaintiff claims that Germain, using an explicative, threatened to throw Plaintiff out the window if he did not "shut up." (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 4; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 4.1). Plaintiff did not report this incident until almost six months later, after Germain reduced Plaintiff and his coworker's access to overtime hours. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 5, 12-13; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 5, 12-13).
Separately, in September 2015, Plaintiff was involved in a domestic incident. Plaintiff's then-girlfriend contacted the police after Plaintiff allegedly sent her a text message of a picture of himself holding a gun to his head. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 6; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 6). The police then confiscated Plaintiff's lawfully possessed guns, and placed Plaintiff under mental hygiene arrest pursuant to the New York Mental Hygiene Law. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 7; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 7). Plaintiff was discharged the following day. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 8; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 8). After the incident, Plaintiff told a "couple of co-workers" that he had a "domestic dispute" with his girlfriend and "that the police took [his] guns for an off period." (Dkt. 40-3 at 37, 42-43).
On Friday, February 5, 2016, Plaintiff met with Germain. Plaintiff was told that locksmith Thomas DeMarco ("DeMarco") would respond to requests outside of working hours relating to lock repairs. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 11; Dkt. 40-3 at 52, 184; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 11-11.1). Plaintiff and his coworker were asked to turn over their master keys. (Id. ). Plaintiff was also told that going forward, he and his fellow mechanic would be "secondary responders." (Dkt. 40-3 at 52). This meant that if the locksmith took every such request, Plaintiff and his co-worker would not receive overtime work (and presumably overtime pay). (Id. ).
Later that day, Plaintiff complained to Defendant Joseph Coffey ("Coffey"), Director of Facility Administration, about Germain's decision to reduce his access to overtime pay and, for the first time, complained about Germain's alleged comment made some six months earlier, threatening to throw Plaintiff out the window. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 12-13; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 12-13). Coffey advised Plaintiff to file a workplace violence report with respect to the alleged comment. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 14; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 14).
On Monday, February 8, 2016, Plaintiff met with Defendant Doug Lee ("Lee"), Associate Personnel Administrator, and completed a Violence Reporting Form. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 15, 17; Dkt. 40-3 at 65, 241; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 15, 17). On the section of the form that asked for a description of what occurred, Plaintiff indicated that he, Germain, and Demarco were working on a "new matrix for Control Rm [sic] Keyboard." (Dkt. 40-3 at 241). Plaintiff wrote: "When I mentioned something was out of order Mr. Germain told me to shut up before he throws me out the window." (Id. ). In response to a separate prompt on the form asking how the event ended, Plaintiff responded: "In total fear of Mr. Germain, constantly working in a hostile environment, was not reported immediately in fear of retaliation." (Id. ). Plaintiff later met with Defendant RPC Executive Director Phillip Griffin ("Griffin") and Lee to further discuss Germain's threat and the loss of potential overtime. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 16; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 16).
On February 29, 2016, Plaintiff was informed that his workplace violence complaint was not substantiated. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 18; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 18). Later that day, Plaintiff completed a New York State Department of Labor Public Employee Safety and Health Bureau form entitled "Notice of Alleged Safety or Health Hazards," complaining about Germain's alleged threat and RPC's determination that this conduct did not constitute workplace violence. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 19; Dkt. 40-3 at 245; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 19). This complaint was received by the Department of Labor on March 2, 2016. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 20; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 20).
Defendants allege that on March 1, 2016, Plaintiff met with his supervisor, Defendant Timothy Coles ("Coles"), and made a series of concerning statements regarding Germain and his decision about locksmith overtime, including statements that Germain "doesn't know who he is messing with and I am sick of his shit" and that Plaintiff previously had his personal firearms taken away. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 21-23). Plaintiff admits that he had a conversation with Coles regarding his personal firearms, but denies speaking with Coles on March 1 and making the statements that Coles attributed to him. (Dkt. 40-3 at 82; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 21.1).
Coles testified that he had also been approached by staff members DeMarco, Charles Smith, and John Gaede ("Gaede") about Plaintiff's behavior. (Dkt. 40-3 at 286-91). According to Coles, Charles Smith told him that Plaintiff said "something big is going to happen Friday" and that he "wouldn't be here after that," and DeMarco told him Plaintiff stated (Id. at 287-89). Plaintiff disputes making these statements but does not dispute that Charles Smith and DeMarco reported these alleged statements to Coles. (Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 25-25.2).
Based on his observations and concerns about possible workplace violence, that same day (March 1, 2016), Coles contacted his supervisor, Coffey. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 27-28; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 27-28). After his discussion with Coffey, at Coffey's request, Coles documented his concerns in an email. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 29-30; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 29-30). This email was then forwarded to Defendant Columba Misseritti ("Misseritti"), Associate Director of Human Resources. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 18, 31; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 18, 31). After an additional email exchange, Misseritti interviewed Coles at approximately 2:30 p.m. on March 1. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 34; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 34).
Shortly thereafter, Misseritti and Lee interviewed employee DeMarco, who confirmed hearing the bow and arrow comment. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶¶ 39-40; 40-3 at 335). According to Misseritti, DeMarco also "placed [employee] Craig Smith in the area." (Dkt. 40-3 at 335). Misseritti and Lee then interviewed Craig Smith, who likewise confirmed hearing Plaintiff make this comment. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 40). Plaintiff disputes making these statements but does not dispute that DeMarco and Craig Smith separately spoke with Misseritti and Lee and reported to them that Plaintiff made these comments. (Dkt. 44-1 at ¶¶ 39-40). Following these interviews, Lee and Misseritti then spoke with Defendant John Burrows ("Burrows"), Bureau of Employee Relations Representative, and were given the authorization to place Plaintiff on administrative leave.2 (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 41; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 41).
On March 2, at about 9:00 a.m., Germain met with Lee and Coles. Germain expressed fear that his family might be harmed by Plaintiff, and Germain was granted permission to leave RPC grounds. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 45; Dkt. 44-1 at ¶ 45). Lee and Misseritti then interviewed Charles Smith at approximately 9:30 a.m., who confirmed hearing Plaintiff state that something big would be happening on Friday and Plaintiff would not be at RPC after that day. (Dkt. 40-1 at ¶ 46). Charles Smith also reported that Plaintiff said he was "getting to" Germain, since Germain apparently had to go to the doctor, and that Plaintiff told him that Plaintiff had been "mental hygiene arrested" and his guns were taken away, but that he was trying to get them back. (Id. at ¶ 47). Finally, Charles Smith told Lee and Misseritti that Plaintiff also "mentioned something about suicide." (Id. at ¶ 48). Plaintiff disputes making these comments but does not dispute that Charles Smith spoke with Lee and Misseritti and reported that he heard Plaintiff make them. (Dkt. 44-1...
To continue reading
Request your trial