Gonzalez v. City of N.Y., 1:17-cv-6518-GHW
Decision Date | 28 March 2019 |
Docket Number | 1:17-cv-6518-GHW |
Citation | 377 F.Supp.3d 273 |
Parties | Emilio GONZALEZ, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Kenechukwu Chudi Okoli, Law Offices of K.C. Okoli, P.C., New York, NY, for Plaintiff.
Ivan A. Mendez, Jr., New York City Law Department, New York, NY, for Defendants.
In February of 2015, Emilio Gonzalez claims that he spoke out against corruption and discrimination in the Office of the Comptroller of the City of New York. His conduct put a bullseye on his back within the office and inspired his coworkers to launch a campaign to end his fourteen-year career in civil service. In response to his coworkers' behavior, Mr. Gonzalez filed this lawsuit, asserting—among others—claims of discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment. The defendants have moved to dismiss. Because Mr. Gonzalez fails to allege that the conduct that he complains of was motivated by his membership in protected groups, the defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part.
Emilio Gonzalez ("Mr. Gonzalez" or "Plaintiff") is a Hispanic-American male who is over forty years old1 and has been working in the Office of the Comptroller of the City of New York (the "Comptroller's Office") for over fourteen years. Dkt. No. 76, Third Amended Complaint (the "TAC"), at ¶¶ 8-9. Mr. Gonzalez began his career in the Comptroller's Office around December 2002. Id. at ¶ 23. Since about February 1, 2016, and at all times relevant to this case, Mr. Gonzalez has faced various medical problems, including herniations in his spinal column, which affect his neck, back, and waist and make it difficult to work behind a desk for any appreciable length of time. Id. at ¶¶ 87-88.
In the Comptroller's Office, Mr. Gonzalez worked with a number of co-workers who he has named as defendants in this suit. At all times relevant to this case, Mr. Gonzalez worked with Seunghwan Kim, who was an assistant comptroller and Mr. Gonzalez's superior. Id. at ¶ 12. Mr. Gonzalez also worked with James Cox, who served as the director of settlements and adjudications in the Bureau of Law and Adjustments (the "Bureau") of the Comptroller's Office. Id. at ¶ 14. Mr. Cox was subordinate to Mr. Kim, but senior to Mr. Gonzalez. Id. Mr. Gonzalez also worked with Katherine Reilly, who served as deputy director of settlements and adjudications in the Bureau of the Comptroller's Office. Id. at ¶ 16. Ms. Reilly was also senior to Mr. Gonzalez, but subordinate to Mr. Cox and Mr. Kim. Id. at ¶¶ 15,17. The final employee that Mr. Gonzalez worked with and identifies as a defendant is Maria Maglio-Scotti. Id. at ¶ 18. Ms. Maglio-Scotti was chief of the motor vehicles unit in the Bureau of the Comptroller's Office and was also senior to Mr. Gonzalez. Id.
Mr. Gonzalez contends that the conduct giving rise to his case derives from his efforts to shine a light on corruption within the Comptroller's Office. Specifically, Mr. Gonzalez alleges that, from the time that Mr. Kim was appointed assistant comptroller through January 2016, he personally informed Mr. Kim that employees in the Department of Education (the "DOE") were intentionally altering claim dispositions to reflect higher rates and speed of performance. Id. at ¶ 25. Mr. Gonzalez also asserts that he told Mr. Kim that DOE employees were in the habit of settling cases without proper investigation. Id. According to Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Kim failed to act and said that "he did not care so long as the cases were moving and the statistics were high." Id. Mr. Gonzalez alleges that Mr. Cox and Ms. Reilly also exhibited indifference to misdeeds within the Comptroller's Office. With respect to Mr. Cox and Ms. Reilly, Mr. Gonzalez claims "it was clear ... that they wanted cases disposed of, not based on merit but upon political considerations[,] which made the Comptroller look good in the eyes of the public and his political supporters." Id. at ¶ 26.
In February 2015, Mr. Gonzalez was promoted and became the division chief of the property damage division. Id. at ¶ 28. Mr. Gonzalez contends that Mr. Kim asked him to terminate Luc Pierre, a black employee in the division, "because he was making more money than any of his colleagues." Id. Mr. Gonzalez claims that he asked Mr. Kim whether he wanted to fire Mr. Pierre because of his race and—according to Mr. Gonzalez—Mr. Kim responded, "yes." Id. Because Mr. Gonzalez found nothing to warrant Mr. Pierre's termination and, furthermore, because he "felt it would be wrong to terminate [him] simply because" of his race, Mr. Gonzalez refused to fire Mr. Pierre as Mr. Kim instructed. Id. at ¶ 29.
During his tenure as division chief, Mr. Gonzalez also represents that he brought practices within the Comptroller's Office that he believed were prohibited by the New York City Charter, the NYC Conflicts of Interest Board, and by state and federal laws to the attention of Mr. Kim, Mr. Cox, and Ms. Reilly. Id. at ¶ 31. These offenses, Mr. Gonzalez claims, included: i) settling claims without proper investigation; ii) expending, approving, or otherwise authorizing the payment of taxpayer money on claims that were not properly investigated; iii)settling claims that "amounted to a de facto scheme to buy taxpayer votes"; and iv) reprimanding, punitively reassigning, or otherwise disciplining employees based on their race. Id. at ¶ 31. Mr. Gonzalez further claims that he continued to inform Mr. Kim of corruption by employees within the DOE team and that he refused to settle claims based on the "personal interests, career ambitions, and political considerations of his supervisors," including Mr. Kim and Mr. Cox. Id. at ¶¶ 32, 34.
In August 2015, Mr. Gonzalez applied for a position as the deputy director of settlements and adjudications, but was not selected for the job. Id. at ¶ 35. Mr. Gonzalez claims that a "white female candidate with inferior credentials" was selected for the position. Id. On January 15, 2016—less than one year after his promotion to division chief—Mr. Gonzalez was demoted to a position with a reduced salary and lesser responsibilities. Id. at ¶ 36. In this demoted position, Mr. Gonzalez claims that he that he had fewer responsibilities than when he began in the Comptroller's Office in 2002. Id. at ¶ 37.
Mr. Gonzalez posits that he was demoted because he refused to settle claims based on political considerations and without proper evaluation and investigation and, furthermore, because he refused to terminate Mr. Pierre as Mr. Kim had directed. Id. at ¶ 38. Before his demotion in January 2016, Mr. Gonzalez never had any performance issues. Id. at ¶ 39. Although he was told that his demotion represented a broader reorganization strategy, Mr. Gonzalez argues that the Comptroller's Office has a pattern and practice of discriminating against older employees of color.2 Id. at ¶¶ 40-41.
On September 21, 2016, Mr. Gonzalez filed an internal grievance (the "Internal Grievance") against Mr. Kim, Mr. Cox, Ms. Reilly, and Ms. Maglio-Scotti (collectively, the "Individual Defendants"). Id. at ¶ 48. In the Internal Grievance, Mr. Gonzalez accused the Individual Defendants of unlawfully discriminating and retaliating against him for his refusal to participate in the fraudulent and improper settlement of claims. Id. Two months later—in November 2016—Mr. Gonzalez filed an unlawful discrimination and retaliation complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC Complaint").3 On January 13, 2017, Mr. Gonzalez filed a complaint with the Department of Investigations of the City of New York (the "DOI Complaint") alleging that his supervisors unlawfully discriminated against him and that employees of the Comptroller's Office engaged in corruption. Id. at ¶ 50.
After his filing of the Internal Grievance, the EEOC Complaint, and the DOI Complaint, Mr. Gonzalez claims that Mr. Kim, Mr. Cox, Ms. Reilly, and Ms. Maglio-Scotti "began to act together and in concert to harass and intimidate [him]." Id. at ¶ 51. On February 13, 2017—one month after Mr. Gonzalez filed the DOI Complaint—the Individual Defendants filed charges of employment misconduct (the "Employee Misconduct Charges") against him. Id. at ¶ 52. Mr. Gonzalez represents that the substance of the Employee Misconduct Charges consisted of incidents that date as far back as November 2, 2002. Id. at ¶ 52. The Individual Defendants also took Mr. Gonzalez to trial at the New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (the "OATH"). Id. at ¶ 53. Mr. Gonzalez contends that the Individual Defendants brought the Employee Misconduct Charges against him in hopes of ending his civil service career. Id. On April 30, 2018, the City terminated his employment. Id. at ¶ 106.
Mr. Gonzalez filed this lawsuit in August 2017, after the Individual Defendants filed the Employee Misconduct Charges. In the operative complaint—the TAC—Mr. Gonzalez asserts a litany of claims and names the Individual Defendants in their personal and official capacities as well as the City of New York (the "City") as defendants (collectively, the "Defendants"). In count one, Mr. Gonzalez asserts a claim of retaliation under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 as well as the New York City Human Rights Law (the "NYCHRL") against the Individual Defendants. See TAC at ¶¶ 58-67. With count two, Mr. Gonzalez asserts a cause of action for discrimination and retaliation under §§ 1981 and 1983 as well as the NYCHRL against the Individual Defendants. See id. at ¶¶ 68-71. In his third count, Mr. Gonzalez states a claim for retaliation under §§ 1981 and 1983 and the NYCHRL for being denied the position for which he applied in November 2016. See id. at ¶¶ 72-76. With his fourth...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gonzalez v. City of N.Y.
...case.SO ORDERED.1 For further background on this dispute, see the Court's prior opinion in this case. Gonzalez v. City of New York (Gonzalez I ), 377 F. Supp. 3d 273 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).2 The facts are viewed in the light most favorable to Gonzalez because he is the non-moving party. See Johnso......
-
In re Joe's Friendly Serv. & Son, Inc.
...527 F.3d 635, 640 n. 1 (7th Cir. 2008) ); see Barnes v. Anderson , 202 F.3d 150, 158-59 (2d Cir. 1999) ; Gonzalez v. City of New York , 377 F. Supp. 3d 273, 287 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). In the Second Circuit, a § 1983 injury may be the reasonably foreseeable result of an individual defendant's cond......
-
Milner-Koonce v. Albany City Sch. Dist.
... ... disability that she had. This claim, therefore, must be ... dismissed.”); Gonzalez v. City of N.Y. , 377 ... F.Supp.3d 273, 298 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (“[T]he conduct that ... 2020” and “July 1,2020 - June 30, 2024” ... “‘[a]ny member who is being considered for a ... transfer initiated by the District may request an ... ...
-
Chidume v. Greenburgh-N. Castle Union Free Sch. Dist.
...at 661. Duplan has been applied both to claims against the municipality and individual municipal defendants. Gonzalez v. City of New York, 377 F. Supp. 3d 273, 285 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). Moreover, section 1981 claims cannot proceed against the individual defendants in their individual capacities.......