Complaint Vs D.G.

STATE OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT
COUNTY OF ERIE
KIMBERLY SNICKLES,
Plaintiff.
vs
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Index No. - - - - - -
DENNIS GABRYSZAK;
ADAM LOCHER;
SHELDON SILVER;
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY, and
STATE OF NEW YORK
Defendants.
Plaintiff, Kimberly Snickles, by her attorneys, the Law Offices of John P.

Bartolomei & Associates, John P. Bartolomei, Esq., of Counsel, for her complaint
against the Defendants, Dennis Gabryszak, Adam Locher, Sheldon Silver, New York
State Assembly, and State of New York, alleges, on personal knowledge as to her
actions and upon information and belief as to the actions of others, as follows:
PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff, Kimberly Snickles ("Plaintiff" or "Snickles"), is and has been at all
times pertinent, a resident of the State of New York.

2.
<Plaintiff was employed by Defendants Gabryszak, New York State
Assembly and State of New York at all times pertinent to this complaint.
3.
Defendant, Dennis Gabryszak is and has been at all times, a resident of
the State of New York and at all times pertinent to this complaint, was a member of the
New York State Assembly, representing the 143rd District.
4.
Defendant, Adam Locher, was a former employee of Defendant, New York
State Assembly and Defendant, State of New York.
He served as Chief of Staff for
Defendant, former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis Gabryszak at all times
pertinent to this complaint.
5.
Defendant, Sheldon Silver, is and has been at all times pertinent, a
resident of the State of New York, and was, at all times pertinent to this complaint and
continues to serve as the Speaker of the New York State Assembly.

6.
As Speaker, it was and remains Defendant Silver's duty to monitor,
supervise, and, if necessary, discipline members of the New York State Assembly for
any inappropriate behavior.
7.
Defendant, New York State Assembly is an elected body of the New
York State government which is established under the New York State Constitution.
Both Defendants Gabryszak and Silver were members of Defendant Assembly at all
times pertinent to this matter.
Plaintiff and Defendant Locher were employees of
Defendant Assembly at all times pertinent to this matter.

8.
Defendant, State of New York is a member of the United States of
America.
Defendant, New York State Assembly is created under the laws of the
Defendant, State of New York.
NATURE OF ACTION
9.
That causes of action brought by Plaintiff Snickles are as follows:

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
I.
m.
n.
o.
p.
Sexual Discrimination
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
Discrimination Under State Law Under New York State
Executive Law Section 296
Executive Law Section 296(7)
Civil Assault
Civil Battery
Negligent Supervision and Retention
Vicarious Liability
Prima Facie Tort
Retaliation
Breach of Contract
Defamation
Slander and Libel
Violation of Statute
Disability Discrimination
2
q.
r.
s.
t.
aa.
bb.
cc.
dd.
ee.
ft.
gg.
hh.
ii.
jj.
kk.
II.
mm.
nn.
00.
pp.
qq.
rr.
ss.
tt.
aaa.
bbb.
ccc.
ddd.
eee.
Interference With Right of Privacy

Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code
Section 8-107(1)
Section 87-107(1)(e)
Constructive Wrongful Discharge
Conspiracy to Commit Sexual Discrimination
Conspiracy to Commit Intentional Infliction of Emotional
Distress
Conspiracy to Commit Negligent Infliction of Emotional
Distress
Conspiracy to Commit Discrimination Under State Law
Under New York State Executive Law Section 296
Conspiracy to Commit Discrimination Under State Law
Under New York State Executive Law Section 296(7)
Conspiracy to Commit Assault
Conspiracy to Commit Battery
Conspiracy to Commit Negligent Supervision and Retention
Conspiracy Resulting in Vicarious Liability
Conspiracy to Commit Prima Facie Tort
Conspiracy to Commit Retaliation
Conspiracy to Commit Breach of Contract
Conspiracy to Commit Defamation
Conspiracy to Commit Slander and Libel
Conspiracy to Commit Violation of Statute
Conspiracy to Commit Disability Discrimination
Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Right of Privacy
Conspiracy to Commit Discrimination Under the New York
City Administrative Code Section 8-107(1)
Conspiracy to Commit Discrimination Under the New York
City Administrative Code Section 8-107(1)(e)
Conspiracy to Commit Constructive Wrongful Discharge
Aiding and Abetting Sexual Discrimination
Aiding and Abetting Intentional Infliction of Emotional
Distress
Aiding and Abetting Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
Aiding and Abetting Discrimination Under State Law Under
New York State Executive Law Section 296
Aiding and Abetting Discrimination Under State Law Under
3
fff.
ggg.
hhh.
iii.
iii
kkk.
III.
mmm.
nnn.
000.
ppp.
qqq.
rrr.
sss.
ttt.
aaaa.
bbbb.
ecce.
dddd.
eeee.
ffff.
gggg.
hhhh.
iiii.
jjjj.
kkkk.
1111.
mmmm.
nnnn.
0000.
pppp.
qqqq.
New York State Executive Law Section 296(7)

Aiding and Abetting Civil Assault
Aiding and Abetting Civil Battery
Aiding and Abetting Negligent Supervision and Retention
Aiding and Abetting ReSUlting in Vicarious Liability
Aiding and Abetting Prima Facie Tort
Aiding and Abetting Retaliation
Aiding and Abetting Breach of Contract
Aiding and Abetting Defamation
Aiding and Abetting Slander and Libel
Aiding and Abetting Violation of Statute
Aiding and Abetting Disability Discrimination
Aiding and Abetting Interference With Right of Privacy
Aiding and Abetting Discrimination Under the New York City
Administrative Code Section 8-107(1)
Aiding and Abetting Discrimination Under the New York City
Administrative Code Section 8-107(1)(e)
Aiding and Abetting Constructive Wrongful Discharge
Sexual Harassment - Punitive Damages
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress - Punitive
Damages
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Punitive
Damages
Executive Law Section 296 - Punitive Damages
Discrimination Under State law Under New York State
Executive Law Section 296(7) - Punitive Damages
Civil Assault - Punitive Damages
Civil Battery - Punitive Damages
Negligent Supervision and Retention - Punitive Damages
Vicarious Liability - Punitive Damages
Prima Facie Tort - Punitive Damages
Retaliation - Punitive Damages
Breach of Contract - Punitive Damages
Defamation - Punitive Damages
Slander and Libel - Punitive Damages
Violation of Statute - Punitive Damages
Disability Discrimination - Punitive Damages
Interference With Right of Privacy - Punitive Damages
rrrr.
ssss.
tttt.
10.

Section 8-107(1) - Punitive Damages
Section 8-107(1)(e) - Punitive Damages
Constructive Wrongful Discharge - Punitive Damages
The causes of action brought against all Defendants are thusly brought as
a result of all Defendants acting in concert with one another and/or their respective
predecessors to further and/or carryout the scheme concocted and/or established by
one or more of such Defendants and/or their respective predecessors.
11.
The causes of actions brought against the public officials individually are
also brought as a result of the conduct, acts and/or actions of such individuals by the
use of their public office and facilities and authorities thereunder and/or outside of their
scope or authority.
12.
To the extent that any cause of action is inconsistent with any other cause
of action, such inconsistent causes of actions are plead alternatively.

13.
To the extent that relief requested for any cause of action is inconsistent
with relief requested for any other cause of action, such inconsistent relief is being
sought alternatively.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
14.
Plaintiff, Snickles was an employee of the Defendants, Gabryszak, New
York State Assembly and State of New York, from May 20, 2013 to October 15, 2013.
15.
That said employment was serving as Communications Director for
Defendant, former Assemblyman, Gabryszak.

16.
That as Communications Director, Plaintiff, Snickles worked on a daily
basis with Defendant, Gabryszak and handled all communications, scheduling,

appearances and legislation on his behalf.
17.
That Plaintiff, Snickles's immediate supervisor, was Defendant, Adam
Locher, who served as Chief of Staff for Defendant, Gabryszak and was employed by
Defendants, Gabryszak, New York State Assembly and State of New York.
5
18.
That throughout
Plaintiff Snickles's tenure
with
the
Defendants,
Gabryszak, Locher, New York State Assembly and State of New York, Defendant,
Silver's duty and responsibility was to oversee Defendant, Gabryszak and other
members of the Defendant, Assembly and their specific behaviors.
19.
During her employment with Defendants, Gabryszak, New York State
Assembly and State of New York, and during working hours and during other work
related activities, Plaintiff was repeatedly, intentionally, and maliciously harassed by
Defendant, Gabryszak, with harassing conduct.
limited to:
Said conduct included, but was not
physical touching, subjecting Plaintiff to sexual jokes, comments and
inquiries, sexually oriented physical contact and gestures, sexually oriented practical
jokes, the posting and presence of pornographic pictures, and the exposing of sexual
artifacts to Plaintiff.
20.
Plaintiff was sexually harassed by Defendant Gabryszak because she is a
woman.
21.
Plaintiff objected to the aforesaid conduct and complained of it to her
immediate supervisor, Defendant, Locher.

22.
behavior.
That Defendant, Locher failed to take any necessary steps to stop the
When Plaintiff Snickles informed Defendant, Locher of Defendant,
Gabryszak's behavior, his response to her was that "he didn't want to be a part of a
sexual harassment complaint" and that "she should talk to the Assemblyman herself".
23.
By virtue of her complaints to the above-mentioned individual, Defendants,
former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis Gabryszak, Adam Locher, Sheldon
Silver, Speaker of the Assembly, New York State Assembly, and the State of New York,
had knowledge of the sexual harassment of the Plaintiff by Defendant Gabryszak.
24.
Despite her complaints to the above-mentioned individual, Defendants,
former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis Gabryszak, Adam Locher, Sheldon
Silver, Speaker of the Assembly, New York State Assembly, and State of New York,
refused to take corrective or remedial action.
25.
Because of the refusal of her supervisor to take corrective or remedial
action, Defendants, former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis Gabryszak, Adam
6
Locher, Sheldon Silver, Speaker of the Assembly, New York State Assembly, and State
of New York acquiesced in the sexual harassment of the Plaintiff by Defendant
Gabryszak.
26.
Such conduct created an offensive, intimidating and hostile work
environment for Plaintiff, made daily work difficult for her, and forced her to resign her
position as Director of Communications for Defendants, Gabryszak, New York State
Assembly and State of New York.
27.
Since Defendants, former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis
Gabryszak, Adam Locher, Sheldon Silver, Speaker of the Assembly, New York State
Assembly, and State of New York, knew of the harassment Plaintiff was subjected to
but refused to take corrective or remedial action, the conduct became a term and
condition of the Plaintiff's employment with Defendant, Gabryszak.
28.
While employed by Assemblyman, Gabryszak, Plaintiff earned a base
salary of $26,000.00.
29.
Because of the sexual harassment suffered by Plaintiff, she was forced to
resign her position with the Defendants, Gabryszak, New York State Assembly and
State of New York, and take other employment. Said employment provided Plaintiff
with a lower salary than Plaintiff earned with Defendants, Gabryszak, New York State
30.
Workers' Compensation remedies are not applicable to the Plaintiff.
31.
That the conduct of former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis
Gabryszak, Adam Locher, Sheldon Silver, Speaker of the Assembly, New York State
Assembly, and State of New York is specifically described as follows:
a.
At her first week on the job in May, 2013, Plaintiff was asked by the
Assemblyman to join him in Albany for a massage. Not knowing anyone in Albany, or
any better, she accompanied him to a massage parlor in Albany.
b.
On her second week on the job, in June, 2013, Plaintiff was taken to
dinner by the Assemblyman TO a local restaurant, the Rusty Nail. The topic of the
conversation at dinner made her very uncomfortable. She was asked questions such
as, "would a man still find a woman attractive if they had a nice set of breasts, but an
7
unattractive face?"
On the way home from the restaurant that same evening, the
Assemblyman told Plaintiff that he was more of a "butt" guy than a "boobs" guy.
c.
In June, 2013, as Plaintiff was being dropped off to her hotel by the
Assemblyman, she became aware that the power in the building was out due to
inclement weather. He invited her to stay with him that evening in his apartment.
d.
In June, 2013, in the Assemblyman's office, the Assemblyman told Plaintiff
and one of his interns a joke about him "having a tattoo on his penis".
e.
In June, 2013, as Plaintiff was walking in a parade with the Assemblyman
and they walked past a set of train tracks, the Assemblyman asked her if she "would like
to be tied up to them".
f.
On or about June 20, 2013, since the session had ended, Plaintiff
intended on spending the night at one of the intern's homes. The intern however, was
going out for the evening and Plaintiff simply wanted to go to sleep. As a result, she
purchased her own hotel room. Upon hearing what she had done, the Assemblyman
said to her, "Why would you do that?
I told you that you could stay at my place".
Plaintiff politely responded that she would feel more comfortable in her own room
because she needed to shower. The Assemblyman quickly responded to her, "I have a
shower".
She was so upset by the Assemblyman's behavior that she called her
boyfriend and mother in tears.

g.
On July 30, 2013, Plaintiff and the Assemblyman were in New York City
for a roundtable event.
She advised the Assemblyman that she was going to be
spending the evening at her grandmother's house in Brooklyn. Despite her plans, the
Assemblyman still invited her to sleep in his hotel room. Later the same day, she was
using the office camera that had recently been purchased for her to use during events
and press conferences. Plaintiff saw photos in the camera of women in New York City
that the Assemblyman had taken the night before. When she asked him about the
pictures, he showed her his iPhone and said that these women had given him their
phone numbers. From looking at the photos it was her belief that these women were
prostitutes.
h.
On July 31, 2013 on the plane ride home back from New York City, the
8
Assemblyman spoke explicitly about his activities the night before in which he had a
"happy ending" from the massage lady in his hotel room that night. This conversation
was very upsetting to Plaintiff.
i.
On numerous occasions in August 2013, the Assemblyman regularly told
Plaintiff and a co-worker that they wear bikinis to his events.

j.
During the time period from June, 2013 through August, 2013, if Plaintiff
and one of her female co-workers rode in the back seat of the Assemblyman's vehicle,
he would regularly look in the rear view mirror and ask them "if they were kissing each
other".
k.
Between September 18, 2013 and September 21, 2013, Plaintiff
accompanied the Assemblyman as part of the Salute to Our Veterans Trip to West Point
and New York City. On the first day they arrived with the veterans at the hotel, the
Assemblyman texted her and asked what room she was in. Plaintiff ignored the text.
Later that day, they were out to lunch and the waitress asked them if they were
together, actually meaning did they want one bill or two. Upon hearing the waitress, the
Assemblyman said, "You hear that Kimberly, we are together. Does that mean we are
getting one room tonight?" Plaintiff responded, "No, she was talking about the bill".
Later on the same trip as they were riding on the ferry to the Statute of Liberty, the
Assemblyman asked her if she would prefer to go on the top of the ferry or the bottom.
She replied the top. The Assemblyman responded, "Oh, you like it on top huh."
I.
The next week at lunch with the staff, the Assemblyman became aware
that one of the staff members, was having a garage sale. He began making fun of her
and said a number of times that she was going to "sell her panties at the garage sale".
The comments made Plaintiff very uncomfortable.
m.
At the same lunch meeting, the Assemblyman made numerous sexual
jokes about the Plaintiff. He told those present that when they were in New York City,
she wanted to see the "naked lady" (an attraction in Time Square of a woman who was
covered in body paint). The Assemblyman proceeded to tell the others at the table that
Plaintiff "tried to stick her tongue down the naked lady's throat". These comments were
obviously untrue and very degrading to Plaintiff. They made her very upset.
9
n.
In October, 2014, Plaintiff met the Assemblyman's Chief of Staff, Adam
Locher, to express her disgust with the Assemblyman's behavior. Mr. Locher advised
her that "he did not want to be involved in a sexual harassment complaint and to speak
with the Assemblyman directly".
Plaintiff then scheduled a meeting with the
Assemblyman. It appeared that he was tipped off to the subject of the meeting by Mr.
Locher.
She waited patiently in the Assemblyman's office for him to appear for the
scheduled meeting, but he failed to do so.

o.
On or about October 15, 2013, Plaintiff met once again with the
Assemblyman's Chief of Staff, Adam Locher. This time, it was to advise him that she
was leaving her position because of the Assemblyman's inappropriate behavior. After
hearing of the most recent incidents, Mr. Locher told her that he "did not blame her for
leaving" and he "apologized on behalf of the Assemblyman".
p.
That throughout Plaintiff's employment with the Assemblyman, she had a
number of fainting spells. She met with her doctor who advised Plaintiff that the spells
were the result of stress at work.
q.
That throughout Plaintiff's employment with the Assemblyman, she also
experienced severe stomach pains. On one occasion, the pain was so sharp that she
passed out. Plaintiff underwent a number of tests for her condition. Said tests were
negative and she was advised by her doctor that her illness was due to stress and
anxiety.
Plaintiff's stomach problems completely went away after she left her
employment with the Assemblyman.

32.
Each and every Defendant conspired with each other Defendant and
acted in concert with one another in an express and/or implied agreement to carry out a
common scheme to create a hostile and offensive workplace for Plaintiff.
33.
Defendant Gabryszak demonstrated a pattern of intentional, malicious and
reckless and negligent behavior from at least August, 2007 through October, 2012
though his position as New York State Assemblyman.
34.
Defendant Gabryszak used his position as Assemblyman to sexually
harass and harm his female employees on a regular and continuous basis.
10
35.
Defendant Gabryszak's behavior began in August, 2007 against his Part
Time Administrator, Emily Trimper and continued until she was constructively
discharged in March, 2008. Said behavior is detailed in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
36.
Defendant Gabryszak's sexually harassing behavior continued with
Director of Communications, Kristy L. Mazurek during her tenure from October, 2008
through her constructive discharge in May, 2009. Said behavior is detailed in Exhibit
"8" attached hereto.
37.
Defendant Gabryszak continued his sexual harassment toward his
employees with Trina Tardone, who served as Director of Communications from June,
2009 through her constructive discharge in January, 2011. Said behavior is detailed in
Exhibit "C" attached hereto.
38.
Defendant Gabryszak's pattern of offensive and illegal behavior continued
in June, 2010 with Jamie Campbell, who served as Legislative Director, persisted until
her constructive discharge on October 25, 2013. Said behavior is detailed in Exhibit "D"
attached hereto.
39.
Defendant Gabryszak's common scheme of sexually harassing behavior
continued in June, 2011 with Annalise C. Freling, who served as Director of

Communications, and persisted until her constructive discharge in March, 2013. Said
behavior is detailed in Exhibit "E" attached hereto.
40.
Defendant Gabryszak's sexual harassment of his employees continued in
May, 2013, with Plaintiff, who served as Director of Communications. Said behavior
continued until her constructive discharge on October 15, 2013. The details of Plaintiff's
hostile and offensive workplace are detailed above.
41.
Defendant Locher took part in the common scheme of sexual harassment
by receiving notice of Defendant Gabryszak's behavior and being deliberately indifferent

by failing to report Defendant Gabryszak's actions or attempting to stop the conduct.
42.
Plaintiff, Emily C. Trimper, Kristy L. Mazurek, Trina Tardone, Jamie
Campbell and Annalise C. Freling all advised Defendant Locher of Defendant

Gabryszak's sexual harassing behavior, yet Defendant Locher, as their immediate
supervisor, failed to take any type of action to stop the conduct.
11
43.
Defendants, Silver, New York State Assembly and State of New York, also
participated in the common scheme of sexual harassment toward Plaintiff. Defendant

Silver, as Defendant Gabryszak's supervisor and Defendants New York State Assembly
and State of New York failed to monitor Defendant Gabryszak and the workplace
environment of Defendant Gabryszak's office. Defendants also failed to provide proper
and effective sexual harassment training for Plaintiff.
44.
That the sexual harassment and failure to take reasonable remedial action
prOXimately caused Plaintiff to leave the Defendants Gabryszak, New York State
Assembly and State of New York's employ, to suffer physically and emotionally, and to
lose esteem, future professional options, future earnings and creative fulfillment in her
chosen career.
45.
That in view of the foregoing, Plaintiff has been damaged by the
Defendants former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis Gabryszak, Sheldon Silver,
Speaker of the Assembly, former Chief of Staff, Adam Locher, New York State
AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
46.
Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all of the allegations
contained in Paragraphs 1 through 45, inclusive, as though they were fully here set
forth.
47.
Defendants are employers within the meaning of the New York State
Human Rights Law (NYSHRL).

48.
Plaintiff is a member of a protected class. The harassment and abuse
were directed against Plaintiff because she is a woman.

49.
Defendants, Locher, Silver, New York State Assembly and State of New
York failed and/or refused to protect Plaintiff from the aforesaid sexual harassment
and/or abate the aforesaid sexual harassment and instead, permitted Defendant,
12
Gabryszak to remain in his position as New York State Assemblyman while

recommending that Plaintiff, the victim of the aforesaid sexual harassment, put up with
the harassment. Defendants' conduct created a hostile work environment which was so
severe as to alter the conditions of her employment. Defendants participated in the
sexual harassment of the Plaintiff and aided and abetted Defendant, Gabryszak.
50.
Defendant, Gabryszak threatened to terminate Plaintiff repeatedly and
emotionally abused her, his continued comments toward her, and the retaliation he took
against her when she refused to acquiesce to his sexual advances amounted to quid
pro quo sexual harassment.
51.
The foregoing acts and/or omissions by the defendants violated the New
York State Executive Law which prohibits sexual discrimination in employment. The
Defendants' conduct constituted gross negligence and was intended to bring about the
harm to the Plaintiff.
52.
As a result of the foregoing actions by the Defendants, Plaintiff has been
damaged in her person, property and employment.

53.
Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to damages against the Defendants, jointly
and severally, in the amount of $4,000,000.
AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
54.
forth.
55.
Each of the Defendants has engaged in such extreme and outrageous
conduct (as outlined in the above Statement of Facts) with intent to cause or disregard
of the substantial probability of causing, severe emotional distress to the Plaintiff.
56.
As a result of such egregious conduct by the Defendants, the Plaintiff has
suffered severe mental pain and anguish.

13
57.
Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to be paid by the Defendants, jointly and
severally, for the Plaintiffs suffering as aforesaid and such an amount as has been lost
economically by the Plaintiff and as a result of the evident distress that was inflicted
upon her by the Defendants in the amount of $10,000,000.
AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:

NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
58.
Plaintiff rea lieges and incorporates by reference all of the allegations
forth.
59.
With a negligent disregard of the emotional impact on the Plaintiff, the
. Defendants wrongfully, in full site of others, created a hostile and offensive workplace
and failed to take action to stop said behavior upon receiving notice of the conduct
60.
In addition, the Defendants sUbjected the Plaintiff in the form of the
various acts undertaken in furtherance of the Defendants' scheme to destroy the

Plaintiff emotionally and economically.
61.
As a result of this negligent conduct and other negligent conduct by the
Defendants (as outlined above in the Statement of Facts), the Plaintiff has suffered
mental pain and anguish.
62.
Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to be paid by the Defendants, jointly and
severally, for the Plaintiff's suffering as aforesaid and such an amount has been lost
economically by the Plaintiff and as a result of the evident distress that was inflicted
upon her by the Defendants in the amount of $10,000,000.
14
AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW UNDER NEW YORK STATE
EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION 296
63.
Plaintiff realieges and incorporates by reference all of the allegations
forth.
64.
Executive Law Section 296 provides that it shall be an unlawful
discriminatory practice: (a) For an employer or licensing agency, because of the age,
race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, military status, sex, disability,
genetic predisposition or carrier status, or marital status of any individual, to refuse to
hire or employ or to bar or to discharge from employment such individual or to
discriminate against such individual in compensation or in terms, conditions or privileges
of employment.
65.
Defendants Gabryszak, New York State Assembly and State of New York
engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice by taking adverse employment action

and otherwise discriminating against the Plaintiff because of her sex and engaging in
sexual harassment and a hostile work environment.
66.
That as a direct result of the foregoing, the Plaintiff has been damaged in
the amount of $4,000,000.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW UNDER NEW YORK STATE EXECUTIVE
LAW SECTION 296(7)
67.
15
forth.
68.
New York State Executive Law Section 296(7) provides that it shall be an
unlawful discriminatory practice:
For any person engaged in any activity to which this

section applies to retaliate or discriminate against any
person because he has opposed any practices
forbidden under this article.
69.
Defendant, Gabryszak, New York State Assembly and State of New York
engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice by taking adverse employment action,

retaliating, and otherwise discriminating against the Plaintiff because of Plaintiff's
opposition to the unlawful employment practices of Defendants.
70.
an amount of $10,000,000.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CIVIL ASSAULT
71.
forth,
72.
On
numerous
occasions
throughout
Plaintiff's
employment,
the
Defendants assaulted the Plaintiff and created a hostile offensive work environment,
including inappropriate comments, jokes and physical touching and touching in such a
manner as would constitute a civil assault.
73.
Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to damages to be paid by the
Defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $3,000,000.
16
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CIVIL BATTERY
74.
forth.
75.
Each time Gabryszak threatened to, and in fact, did inflict physical abuse
on Plaintiff's person including inappropriate comments, jokes and physical touching and
touching in such a manner, that he gave Plaintiff reason to fear and expect bodily injury
the next time she was in Gabryszak's presence.
76.
Gabryszak intended these attacks to be harmful and offensive and to
cause Plaintiff apprehension and fear, which they did.

77.
Such conduct and constitutes Civil Battery which has resulted in grave
injury to Plaintiff physically and psychologically.

78.
Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to an award against the Defendants, jointly
and severally, for damages in the amount of $4,000,000.

AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND RETENTION
79.
forth.
80.
Upon information and belief, Gabryszak has engaged in inappropriate,
abusive and harassing conduct toward the Plaintiff.

81.
Defendants Locher, Silver, New York State Assembly and State of New
York, knew of defendant, Gabryszak's abusive and harassing conduct toward Plaintiff.
17
Upon information and belief, Gabryszak had a long history of abusive conduct that
predated Plaintiff's appointment as Director of Communications.
82.
By ignoring Plaintiff's complaints and the many complaints of others made
prior to and during Plaintiff's employment, Defendants negligently retained and/or failed
to supervise the actions of Gabryszak, Silver was grossly negligent in his failure to
supervise and remove Gabryszak and intended the harm to the Plaintiff.
83.
The foregoing acts and negligence by the Defendants, has resulted in
grave injury to Plaintiff physically and psychologically.

84.
AS AND FOR A NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

VICARIOUS LIABILITY
85.
forth.
86.
Defendant, Gabryszak was employed by Defendant, New York State
Assembly and State of New York. Locher was also employed by Defendant, New York
State Assembly and State of New York.
Defendant, Silver, was Speaker of the
Assembly, and had a duty to supervise Defendants, Gabryszak and Locher.

Defendants, Gabryszak and Locher's actions were taken through their positions as
pUblic officers.
Defendant Gabryszak's behaVior, in particular was committed both
within and outside of the scope of his authority as a New York State Assemblyman. As
a result, Defendants, New York State Assembly, State of New York and Silver were
vicariously liable for the behaviors of Defendants, Gabryszak and Locher.
87.
Defendants, through Plaintiff's discussions with Defendant, Locher, knew
of Defendant, Gabryszak's abusive and harassing conduct toward Plaintiff.
Upon
information and belief, Defendant, Gabryszak had a long history of abusive conduct that
18
predated Plaintiff's appointment as Communications Director. In order to cover up

Gabryszak's harassment and abuse of Plaintiff and to give the appearance that
Gabryszak's conduct toward Plaintiff was not taking place, Defendant, Gabryszak
determined to maintain the status quo. The Defendants required Plaintiff to continue
working with Gabryszak and took no steps to prevent Gabryszak's conduct toward
Plaintiff from taking place.
88.
The course of action chosen by the Defendants assured that Gabryszak's
abusive and harassing conduct toward Plaintiff would continue.
Due to the fact that
much of Defendant Gabryszak and Locher's actions were committed within the scope of
their employment, Defendants, New York State Assembly, State of New York and Silver
are liable for Defendant Gabryszak and Locher's actions under the doctrine of
respondeat superior.
89.
The foregoing actions by the Defendants caused Plaintiff grave injury and
damage to her person, property and employment.

90.

AS AND FOR A TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
PRIMA FACIA TORT
91.
forth.
92.
The above conduct and acts by the Defendants, individually and in concert
with one another, constitutes a prima facie tort.

93.
As a result of the tortious conduct against the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses.

94.
The Plaintiff is entitled to an award against the Defendants jointly and
severally in the amount of $10,000,000.

19
AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

RETALIATION
95.
forth.
96.
Gabryszak.
Plaintiff
has
served
as
Communications
Director for
Defendant,
As is hereinabove set forth, Plaintiff repeatedly told defendants of
Gabryszak's egregarious conduct, including his sexual abuse and harassment of her.
Defendants repeatedly refused to take any action to prevent Gabryszak from harassing
and abusing Plaintiff.
97.
Once Plaintiff refused Defendant Gabryszak's sexual advances, he
retaliated against her by forcing her to pay for her travel and accommodations when in
Albany. These expenses were to have been paid for by Defendant Gabryszak.
98.
Thereafter, defendants retaliated against the Plaintiff economically until
she was forced to quit her employment with the Defendant, Gabryszak.
99.
Such retaliatory discharge violated New York State Human Rights Law
Section 296(1 )(e) and caused Plaintiff grave injury to her person, property and
employment and emotional distress.
100.
AS AND FOR A TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

BREACH OF CONTRACT
101.
forth.
20
102.
Upon information and belief, the Plaintiff's employment with the
Defendants, Gabryszak, New York State Assembly and State of New York was and is
subject to a contract of employment which covers the terms and conditions of Plaintiff's
employment, including implicitly a prohibition of sexual harassment in the implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the contract.
103.
By their conduct, Defendants defaulted completely on their obligations
under the contract. They breached their covenant of good faith and fair dealing in their
employment contract with Plaintiff. They imposed undue burdens on the performance
of Plaintiff's duties under the employment contract, denied her service and support and
a safe place of employment within which to perform her duties.
104.
Upon information and belief, there is either an express and/or implied
condition that no retaliation or other adverse employment action be taken against the
Plaintiff as a result of her making complaints about sexual harassment in the workplace.
105.
Defendant, Gabryszak threatened to discharge the Plaintiff from her
position because of her refusal to acquiesce to his sexual advances.

106.
The foregoing breach of contract has damaged the Plaintiff professionally,
in her employment, in her person, property and denied her the benefits of her
agreement.
107.

AS AND FOR A THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
DEFAMATION
108.
forth.
109.
The Plaintiff has been forced to defend public comments made against her
by Defendant, Gabryszak. The former Assemblyman's published comments were that

21
Plaintiff, Tardone's allegations against him were "patently untrue".

110.
Such comments were completely untrue and were brought to accomplish
the Defendants' improper purpose and scheme against the Plaintiff, to defame and
disparage and wrongfully discharge and inflict emotional distress and unfairly compete
and tortuously interfere with prospective business advantage by assisting in the
preparation and disbursement of the false and disparaging statements which constitute
defamation all to the detriment and damage of the Plaintiff.
111.
As a result, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages against the
Defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $4,000,000.

AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
SLANDER AND LIBEL
112.
forth.
113.
The Plaintiff has been forced to defend herself with the public and local
media due to the fact that Defendant, Gabryszak pUblicly denied Plaintiff's allegations
and stated that they were "patently untrue".
114.
Such comments by Defendant, Gabryszak were completely untrue and
was brought to accomplish Defendants' improper purpose and scheme against the
Plaintiff, to defame and disparage and wrongfully discharge and inflict emotional
distress and unfairly complete and tortuously interfere with prospective business
advantage by assisting in the preparation and disbursement of the false and
disparaging statements and such use of civil process constitutes slander and libel, all to
the detriment and damage of the Plaintiff.
115.
As a result, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages against the
Defendants, jointly and severally in the amount of $10,000,000
22
AS AND FOR A FIFTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

VIOLATION OF STATUTE
116.
forth.
117.
The Defendants, acting in concert with one another, have violated a
number of New York State laws, statutes, rules and relations which provide for the
health, welfare and protection of the public and the Plaintiff.
118.
The Defendants have violated the laws, rules and regulations of the State
of New York by subjecting Plaintiff to a hostile and offensive work environment as well
as direct acts of sexual harassment by Defendant, Gabryszak.
119.
These violations of the laws of the State of New York have damaged the
Plaintiff in that the Plaintiff was unable to continue her employment and further that the
Defendants' scheme has now progressed to the level of all of the other torts alleged in
this Complaint.
120.
Therefore, the Defendants must be enjoined from further violation of
statutes and laws and the Defendants must compensate the Plaintiff for her direct
damages resulting from these violations of statutes and from other claims alleged in the
Complaint which arise from these statute and law violations by the Defendants in the
amount of $4,000.000.
AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
121.
23
forth.
122.
Plaintiff is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder as a consequence
of defendant Gabryszak's sexual harassment which impaired her ability to perform her
duties as Communication Director for Defendant Gabryszak.
123.
Post-traumatic stress disorder is disability within the meaning of the
Human Rights Law 296.

124.
Plaintiff advised Defendant Locher of Defendant Gabryszak's behavior so
that it would stop and that she would not need an accommodation for her disability.
125.
Defendants refused to stop the unwanted behavior or to consider an
accommodation or to consider that other accommodation might be made that would

ameliorate the effects of the PTSD. Instead, defendants took actions which made it
impossible for her to perform the functions of her job, thereby greatly aggravating and
exacerbating her symptoms of PTSD.
126.
Defendants conduct violated the prohibition of the Human Rights Law
against discrimination on the basis of disability causing plaintiff grave injury to her
person and property and emotional distress.
127.
and severally, in the amount of $4;000,000.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT OF PRIVACY
AGAINST All DEFENDANTS
128.
forth.
129.
Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendants, New York State
Assembly and State of New York, Defendant Gabryszak continuously invaded Plaintiff's
privacy and personal space.
Said invasion included personal contact as well as
invasion of her emotional well-being.

24
130.
As a result, Plaintiff is entitled to be paid by the Defendants, jointly and
severally, for damages in the amount of $4,000,000.
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK CITY
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 8-107(1)
131.
forth.
132.
The Administrative Code of City of NY 8-107(1) provides that "it shall be
an unlawful discriminatory practice: "(a) For an employer or an employee or agent

thereof, because of the actual or perceived age, race, color, national origin, gender,
disability, marital status, sexual orientation or alienage or citizenship status of any
person, to refuse to hire or employ or to bar or to discharge from employment such
person or to discriminate against such person in compensation or in terms, conditions or
privileges of employment".
133.
Defendant Gabryszak during and through his numerous trips to New York
City engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice in violation of New York State

Administrative Code Title 8, 8-107(1)(a) by actually and constructively taking adverse
employment action, creating and maintaining discriminatory working conditions, and
otherwise discriminating against the Plaintiff because of her sex and engaging in sexual
harassment and a hostile work environment.
134.
an amount which exceeds the jurisdictional limits of all lower Courts.

135.
Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to be paid by Defendants, jointly and
severally, for damages in the amount of $4,000,000.
25
AS AND FOR A NINETEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK CITY
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE S-107(1)(e)
136.
forth.
137.
The New York City Administrative Code Title 8, 8-1 07(1 )(e) provides that
it shall be unlawful discriminatory practice:

"For an employer. .. to discharge... or otherwise discriminate against any
person because such person has opposed any practices forbidden under this
chapter. .. "
138.
Defendant Gabryszak during and through his numerous trips to New York
City engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice in violation of New York City

Administrative Code Title 8, 8-107(1)(e) by taking adverse employment action and
otherwise discriminating against the Plaintiff because of Plaintiffs opposition to the
unlawful employment practices of Plaintiff's employer.
139.

AS AND FOR A TWENTIETH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL DISCHARGE
140.
contained in Paragraphs 1
through~ 139,
inclusive, as though they were fully here set
forth.
141.
Throughout Plaintiffs employment with Defendants, Gabryszak, New York
State Assembly, and State of New York, she was subjected to such a hostile and
26
offensive environment at the hands of Defendant Gabryszak, that it was unbearable for
her to work for said Defendants.
142.
Based upon the above hostile work environment, Plaintiff had no
alternative other than to quit her employment.

143.
That because of her being forced to leave her employment with the
Defendants due to the outrageous and offensive conduct of Defendant Gabryszak,

Plaintiff was constructively wrongfully discharged from her employment.
144.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION
145.
forth.
146.
acted in concert with one another, in an express and/or implied agreement, to carry out
their scheme.
147.
Specifically, each and every Defendant conspired with each other
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit Sexual Discrimination
against the Plaintiff.
148.
Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to an award against each and every
Defendant, jointly and severally, for damages in the amount of $4,000,000.
27
AS AND FOR A TWENTY SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
149.
forth.
150.
acted in concert with one another in an express or implied agreement to carry out their
scheme.
151.
Specifically, each and every Defendant conspired with each other and
acted in concert with one another to intentionally inflict emotional distress on the
Plaintiff.
152.

AS AND FOR A TWENTY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
153.
forth.
154.
acted in concert with one another in an express or implied agreement to carry out their
scheme.
155.
Specifically, each and every Defendant conspired with each other and
acted in concert with one another to negligently inflict emotional distress on the Plaintiff.
28
156.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW
UNDER NEW YORK STATE EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION 296
157.
contained in Paragraphs 1 through 156, inclusive, as though they were fully set forth.
158.
acted in concert with one another in an express of implied agreement to carry out their
scheme.
159.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit discrimination under State
Law under New York State Executive Law Section 296 against the Plaintiff.
160.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW
UNDER NEW YORK STATE EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION 296(7)
161.
contained in Paragraphs 1 through 160, inclusive, as though they were fUlly set forth.
162.
acted in concert with one another in an express of implied agreement to carry out their
scheme.
163.
29
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit discrimination under State
Law under New York State Executive Law Section 296(7) against the Plaintiff.
164.
Defendant, jointly and severally, for damages in the amount of $4,000,000
AS AND FOR A TWENTY SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT CIVIL ASSAULT
165.
forth.
166.
their scheme.
167.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit civil assault against the
Plaintiff.
168.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT CIVIL SATTERY
169.
forth.
170.
30
their scheme.
171.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit civil battery against the
Plaintiff.
172.

AS AND FOR A TWENTY-EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CONSPIRACY TO NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND RETENTION
173.
forth.
174.
their scheme.
175.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit Negligent Supervision and
Retention against the Plaintiff.
176.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY RESULTING IN VICARIOUS LIABILITY
177.
forth.
31
178.
their scheme.
179.
Defendant and acted in con.cert with one another.
Therefore, each Defendant is
vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the respective acts of each other Defendant.
180.
AS AND FOR A THIRTIETH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT PRIMA FACIE TORT
181.
forth.
182.
their scheme.
183.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit prima facie tort against the
Plaintiff.
184.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT RETALIATION
185.

32
forth.
186.
their scheme.
187.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit retaliation against the
Plaintiff.
188.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT BREACH OF CONTRACT
189.
forth.
190.
their scheme.
191.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit breach of contract against
the Plaintiff.
192.
33
AS AND FOR A THIRTY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DEFAMATION
193.
forth.
194.
their scheme.
195.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit defamation against the
Plaintiff.
196.

AS AND FOR A THIRTY FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SLANDER AND LIBEL
197.
contained in Paragraphs 1 through 196, inclusive, as though they were fully set forth.
198.
their scheme.
199.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit slander and libel against the
Plaintiff.
200.
Defendant, jointly and severally, for damages in the amount of $1 0,000,000.

34
AS AND FOR A THIRTY FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT VIOLATIONS OF STATUTE
201.
forth.
202.
their scheme.
203.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit violation of statute against
the Plaintiff.
204.

AS AND FOR A THIRTY SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
205.
forth.
206.
their scheme.
207.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit disability discrimination
against the Plaintiff.
208.

35
AS AND FOR A THIRTY SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT OF PRIVACY
209.
forth.
210.
their scheme.
211.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit interference with right of
privacy against the Plaintiff.
212.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 8-107(1)
213.
forth.
214.
their scheme.
36
215.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit discrimination under the
New York City Administrative Code Section 8-107(1) against the Plaintiff.
216.

AS AND FOR A THIRTY NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 8-107(1)(e)
217.
forth.
218.
their scheme.
219.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit discrimination under the
New York City Administrative Code Section 8-107(1)(e) against the Plaintiff.
220.

AS AND FOR A FORTIETH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL DISCHARGE
221.
forth.
37
222.
their scheme.
223.
Defendant and acted in concert with one another to commit constructive wrongful
discharge against the Plaintiff.
224.
AS AND FOR A FORTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION
225.
forth.
226.
Each and every Defendant has aided and abetted each and every other
Defendant and combination of other Defendants in carrying out their scheme.

227.
Specifically, each and every Defendant aided and abetted every other
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes sexual
discrimination against the Plaintiff.
228.
Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages against each
and every Defendant, jointly and severally, in the amount of $4,000,000.
AS AND FOR A FORTY SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
229.

38
forth.
230.
Defendant and combination of other Defendants in carrying out their schemes.

231.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes
intentional infliction of emotional distress against the Plaintiff.
232.
AS AND FOR A FORTY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
233.
contained in Paragraphs 1 through 232, inclusive, as though they were fUlly here set
forth.
234.

235.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes negligent
infliction of emotional distress against the Plaintiff.
236.
39
AS AND FOR A FORTY FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW UNDER
NEW YORK EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION 296
237.
forth.
238.

239.
discrimination under State Law Under New York Executive Law Section 296 against the
Plaintiff.
240.
AS AND FOR A FORTY FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW UNDER
NEW YORK EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION 296(7)
241.
forth.
242.

243.
discrimination under State Law Under New York Executive Law Section 296(7) against
40
the Plaintiff.
244.
and every Defendant, jointly and severally, in the amount of $4,000,000
AS AND FOR A FORTY SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING CIVIL ASSAULT
245.
forth.
246.

247.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes civil
assault against the Plaintiff.
248.
AS AND FOR A FORTY SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING CIVIL BATTERY
249.
forth.
250.

251.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes civil
41
battery against the Plaintiff.

252.
AS AND FOR A FORTY EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND RETENTION
253.
forth.
254.

255.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes negligent
supervision and retention against the Plaintiff.
256.
AS AND FOR A FORTY NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING RESULTING IN VICARIOUS LIABILITY
257.
forth.
258.

259.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that results in respective
42
vicarious liability of each Defendant for the respective acts of each other Defendant.
260.
AS AND FOR A FIFTIETH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING PRIMA FACIE TORT
261.
forth.
262.

263.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes prima
facie tort against the Plaintiff.
264.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING RETALIATION
265.
forth.
266.

267.
43
retaliation against the Plaintiff.

268.

AS AND FOR A FIFTY SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:
AIDING AND ABETTING BREACH OF CONTRACT
269.
forth.
270.

271.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes breach of
contract against the Plaintiff.
272.

AS AND FOR A FIFTY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:
AIDING AND ABETTING DEFAMATION
273.
forth.
274.
Defendant and combination of other Defendants in carrying out their schemes.

275.
44
defamation against the Plaintiff.

276.

AS AND FOR A FIFTY FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
AIDING AND ABETTING SLANDER AND LIBEL
277.
forth.
278.

279.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes slander
and libel against the Plaintiff.
280.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING VIOLATION OF STATUTE
281.
forth.
282.

283.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes violation
45
of statute against the Plaintiff.

284.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
285.
forth.
286.

287.
Defendant in committing the acts and engaging in the conduct that constitutes disability
discrimination against the Plaintiff.
288.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT OF PRIVACY
289.
forth.
290.

291.
46
interference with right of privacy against the Plaintiff.

292.

AS AND FOR A FIFTY EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
AIDING AND ABETTING DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK CITY
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 8-107(1)
293.
forth.
294.

295.
discrimination under the New York City Administrative Code Section 8-107(1) against
the Plaintiff.
296.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
AIDING AND ABETTING DISRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK CITY

ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 8-107(1)(e)
297.
forth.
298.
47

299.
discrimination under the New York City Administrative Code Section 8-107(1 )(e) against
the Plaintiff.
300.
AS AND FOR A SIXTIETH CAUSE OF ACTION:

AIDING AND ABETTING CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL DISCHARGE
301.
forth.
302.

303.
constructive wrongful discharge against the Plaintiff.
304.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

SEXUAL HARASSMENT - PUNITIVE DAMAGES
305.
forth.
48
306.
The acts of the Defendants in committing sexual harassment against
Plaintiff are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to
harm that punitive damages must be awarded.
307.
Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against the Defendants,
jointly and severally, in the amount of $4,000,000.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL
DISTRESS: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
308.
forth.
309.
The acts of the Defendants in committing intentional infliction of emotional
distress against Plaintiff are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness,
malice and intent to harm that punitive damages must be awarded.
310.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:

NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
311.
contained in Paragraph 1 through 310, inclusive, as though they were fully here set
forth.
312.
The acts of the Defendants in committing negligent infliction of emotional
distress against Plaintiff are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness,
49
313.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW UNDER NEW YORK STATE
EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION 296: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
314.
forth.
315.
The acts of the Defendants in committing discrimination under State Law
Under New York State Executive Law Section 296 against Plaintiff are so egregious and
conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to harm that punitive damages
must be awarded.
316.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER STATE LAW UNDER NEW YORK STATE EXECUTIVE
LAW SECTION 296(7): PUNITIVE DAMAGES
317.
forth.
318.
The acts of the Defendants in committing discrimination under State Law
Under New York State Executive Law Section 296(7) against Plaintiff are so egregious
and conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to harm that punitive damages
must be awarded.
50
319.

AS AND FOR A SIXTY SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CIVIL ASSAULT: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
320.
forth.
321.
The acts of the Defendants in committing civil assault against Plaintiff are
so egregious and conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to harm that
punitive damages must be awarded.
322.

AS AND FOR A SIXTY SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
CIVIL BATTERY: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
323.
forth.
324.
The acts of the Defendants in committing civil battery against Plaintiff are
325.
51
AS AND FOR A SIXTY EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND RETENTION: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
326.
forth.
327.
The acts of the Defendants in committing negligent supervision and
retention against Plaintiff are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness,
328.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

VICARIOUS LIABILITY: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
329.
forth.
330.
The acts of the Defendants committed, were committed by each
Defendant in concert with one another and was against Plaintiff so egregious and
conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to harm, that punitive damages
must be awarded against each Defendant for the respective acts of each other
Defendant.
331.
52
AS AND FOR A SEVENTIETH CAUSE OF ACTION:

PRIMA FACIE TORT: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
332.
forth.
333.
The acts of the Defendants in committing prima facie tort against Plaintiff
are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to harm that
334.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

RETALIATION: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
335.
Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all of the allegl:1tions
forth.
336.
The acts of the Defendants in committing retaliation against Plaintiff are so
egregious and conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to harm that
337.
53
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

BREACH OF CONTRACT: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
338.
forth.
339.
The acts of the Defendants in committing breach of contract against
340.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:

DEFAMATION: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
AGAINST ALL DAMAGES
341.
forth.
342.
The acts of the Defendants in committing .defamation against Plaintiff are
343.
54
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

SLANDER AND LIBEL: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
AGAINST ALL DAMAGES
344.
forth.
345.
The acts of the Defendants in committing slander and libel against Plaintiff
are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness, malice and intent to harm that
346.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

VIOLATION OF STATUTE: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
347.
forth.
348.
The acts of the Defendants in committing violation of statute against
349.
55
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
350.
forth.
351.
The acts of the Defendants in committing disability discrimination against
352.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT OF PRIVACY: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
353.
forth.
354.
The acts of the Defendants in committing interference with right of privacy
against Plaintiff are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness, malice and
intent to harm that punitive damages must be awarded.
355.
56
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
SECTION 8-107(1): PUNITIVE DAMAGES
356.
forth.
357.
The acts of the Defendants in committing discrimination under the New
York City Administration Code Section 8-107(1) against Plaintiff are so egregious and
must be awarded.
358.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTY NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:

DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINSTRATIVE CODE
SECTION 8-107(1)(e): PUNITIVE DAMAGES
359.
forth.
360.
The acts of the Defendants in committing discrimination under the New
York City Administrative Code Section 8-107(1)(e) against Plaintiff are so egregious and
must be awarded.
361.
57
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTIETH CAUSE OF ACTION:

CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL DISCHARGE: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
362.
forth.
363.
The acts of the Defendants 'in committing constructive wrongful discharge
against Plaintiff are so egregious and conducted with such recklessness, malice and
intent to harm that punitive damages must be awarded.
364.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the following award and judgment against each
and every one of the Defendants, individually and joint and separately:
(1)
On the first cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Sexual Discrimination
in the amount of $4,000,000.

(2)
On the second cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Intentional Infliction
of Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(3)
On the third cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Negligent Infliction of
Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(4)
On the fourth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Discrimination Under
State Law Under New York State Executive Law Section 296 in the amount of
$4,000,000.
(5)
On the fifth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Discrimination Under
State Law Under New York State Executive Law Section 296(7) in the amount of
$10,000,000.
(6)
On the sixth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Civil Assault in the
amount of $3,000,000.
(7)
On the seventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Civil Battery in the
58
amount of $4,000,000.
(8)
On the eighth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Negligent
Supervision and Retention in the amount of $10,000,000.

(9)
On the ninth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Vicarious Liability in

(10)
On the tenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Prima Facie Tort in

(11)
On the eleventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Retaliation in the
amount of $4,000,000.
(12)
On the twelfth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Breach of Contract

(13)
On the thirteenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Defamation in the
amount of $4,000,000.
(14)
On the fourteenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Slander and
Libel in the amount of $10,000,000.

(15)
On the fifteenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Violation of Statute

(16)
On the sixteenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Disability
Discrimination in $4,000,000.
(17)
On the seventeenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Interference
With Right of Privacy in the amount of $4,000,000.

(18)
On the eighteenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Discrimination
Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section 8-107(1) in an amount of
$4,000,000.
(19)
On the nineteenth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Discrimination
Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section 8-107(1)(e) in the amount
of $4,000,000.
(20)
On the twentieth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Constructive
Wrongful Discharge in the amount of $4,000,000.

(21)
On the twenty first cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
59
Commit Sexual Discrimination in the amount of $4,000,000.

(22)
On the twenty second cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy
to Commit Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(23)
On the twenty third cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(24)
On the twenty fourth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Discrimination Under State Law Under New York State Executive Law Section
296 in the amount of $4,000,000.
(25)
On the twenty fifth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Discrimination Under State Law Under New York State Executive Law Section
296(7) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(26)
On the twenty sixth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Civil Assault in the amount of $3,000,000.

(27)
On the twenty seventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy
to Commit Civil Battery in the amount of $4,000,000.

(28)
On the twenty eighth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Negligent Supervision and Retention in the amount of $10,000,000.

(29)
On the twenty ninth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Vicarious Liability in the amount of $4,000,000.

(30)
On the thirtieth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Prima Facie Tort in the amount of $10,000,000.

(31)
On the thirty first cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Retaliation in the amount of $4,000,000.

(32)
On the thirty second cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Breach of Contract in the amount of $4,000,000.

(33)
On the thirty third cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Defamation inthe amount of $4,000,000.

(34)
On the thirty fourth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Slander and Libel in the amount of $10,000,000.

(35)
On the thirty fifth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
60
Commit Violation of Statute in the amount of $4,000,000.

(36)
On the thirty sixth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Disability Discrimination in the amount of $4,000,000.

(37)
On the thirty seventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Interference With Right of Privacy in the amount of $4,000,000.

(38)
On the thirty eighth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section 8107(1) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(39)
On the thirty ninth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section
8-107(1)(e) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(40)
On the fortieth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Conspiracy to
Commit Constructive Wrongful Discharge in the amount of $4,000,000.

(41)
On the forty-first cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in the Sexual Discrimination in the amount of $4,000,000.

(42)
On the forty second cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in the Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(43)
On the forty third cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in the Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(44)
On the forty fourth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Discrimination Under State Law Under New York State Executive Law
Section 296 in the amount of $4,000,000.
(45)
On the forty fifth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Discrimination Under State Law Under New York State Executive Law
Section 296(7) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(46)
On the forty sixth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Civil Assault in the amount of $3,000,000.

(47)
On the forty seventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Civil Battery in the amount of $4,000,000.

(48)
On the forty eighth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
61
Abetting in Negligent Supervision and Retention in the amount of $10,000,000.

(49)
On the forty ninth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Vicarious Liability in the amount of $4,000,000.

(50)
On the fiftieth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and Abetting
in Prima Facie Tort in the amount of $10,000,000.

(51)
On the fifth first cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Retaliation in the amount of $4,000,000.

(52)
On the fifty second cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Breach of Contract in the amount of $4,000,000.

(53)
On the fifty third cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Defamation in the amount of $4,000,000.

(54)
On the fifty fourth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Slander and Libel in the amount of $10,000,000.

(55)
On the fifty fifth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Violation of Statute in the amount of $4,000,000.

(56)
On the fifty sixth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Disability Discrimination in the amount of $4,000,000.

(57)
On the fifty seventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding in
Abetting in Interference With Right of Privacy in the amount of $4,000,000.

(58)
On the fifty eighth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding in
Abetting in Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section
8-107(1) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(59)
On the fifty ninth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and
Abetting in Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section
8-107(1)(e) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(60)
On the sixtieth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Aiding and Abetting
in Constructive Wrongful Discharge in the amount of $4,000,000.

(61)
On the sixty first cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Sexual Harassment in the amount of $4,000,000.

(62)
On the sixty second cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
62
Damages: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(63)
On the sixty third cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress in the amount of $10,000,000.

(64)
On the sixty fourth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Discrimination Under State Law Under New York State Executive Law
.Section 296 in the amount of $4,000,000.
(65)
On the sixty- fifth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Discrimination Under State Law Under New York State Executive Law
Section 296(7) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(66)
On the sixty sixth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Civil Assault in the amount of $3,000,000.

(67)
On the sixty seventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Civil Battery in the amount of $4,000,000.

(68)
On the sixty eighth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Negligent Supervision and Retention in the amount of $10,000,000.

(69)
On the sixty ninth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Vicarious Liability in the ClrTl0unt of $4,000,000.

(70)
On the seventieth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Prima Facie Tort in the amount of $10,000,000.

(71)
On the seventy first cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Retaliation in the amount of $4,000,000.

(72)
On the seventy second cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Breach of Contract in the amount of $4,000,000.

(73)
On the seventy third cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Defamation in the amount of $4,000,000.

(74)
On the seventy fourth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Slander and Libel in the amount of $10,000,000.

(75)
On the seventy fifth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Violation of Statute in the amount of $4,000,000.

(76)
On the seventy sixth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive

63
Damages: Disability Discrimination in the amount of $4,000,000.

(77)
On the seventy seventh cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Interference With Right of Privacy in the amount of $4,000,000.

(78)
On the seventy eighth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section
8-107(1) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(79)
On the seventy ninth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code Under Section
8-107(1)(e) in the amount of $4,000,000.
(80)
On the eightieth cause of action by Plaintiff Snickles for Punitive
Damages: Constructive Wrongful Discharge in the amount of $4,000,000.

Awarding Plaintiff such other and further relief as to the Court may deem
equitable, just and proper.
Dated: November 11, 2014
Niagara Falls, New York
. BARTOLOMEI, ESQ
LAW FFICES OF
~ HN P. BARTOLOMEI & ASSOCIATES
Atto eys for Plaintiff
335 'Buffalo Avenue
Niagara Falls, New York 14303
(716)282-2774
64
VERIFICATION BY ATTORNEY
STATE OF NEW YORK)

SS:
COUNTY OF NIAGARA)
JOHN P. BARTOLOMEI, ESQ, being duly sworn, deposes and states under the
penalties of perjury that: I am an attorney duly admitted to practice in the courts of New
York State and am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff, KIMBERLY SNICKLES, in the
within action;
I have read read the foregoing, COMPLAINT, and knows the contents thereof;
that the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters stated to be
alleged upon information and belief; and that as to those matters he believes them to be
true.
The reason this verification is made by me and not by the plaintiff is that the
plaintiff resides in a county other than where we maintain our office.
The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge
are as follows: Conversations with the plaintiff, other witnesses, review of file and all
pleadings and proceedings heretofore had herein.
Dated: Niagara Falls, New York

November 11, 2014
Sworn to before me this
II 'IIA.-
d~~
Notary Public
MARIA ;... NUCHERENO
NOTARY PUBLlCSiATE of NEW YORK
No. 01 NU4858634
Qualified in Erie County
My Commission Expires May 12, 2018
65

Complaint Vs D.G.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complaint Vs D.G.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STATE OF NEW YORK

Plaintiff, Kimberly Snickles, by her attorneys, the Law Offices of John P.

Plaintiff, Kimberly Snickles ("Plaintiff" or "Snickles"), is and has been at all

times pertinent, a resident of the State of New York.

<Plaintiff was employed by Defendants Gabryszak, New York State

Defendant, Dennis Gabryszak is and has been at all times, a resident of

Defendant, Adam Locher, was a former employee of Defendant, New York

State Assembly and Defendant, State of New York.

He served as Chief of Staff for

Defendant, Sheldon Silver, is and has been at all times pertinent, a

continues to serve as the Speaker of the New York State Assembly.

As Speaker, it was and remains Defendant Silver's duty to monitor,

Defendant, New York State Assembly is an elected body of the New

Plaintiff and Defendant Locher were employees of

Defendant Assembly at all times pertinent to this matter.

Defendant, State of New York is a member of the United States of

Defendant, State of New York.

That causes of action brought by Plaintiff Snickles are as follows:

Interference With Right of Privacy

New York State Executive Law Section 296(7)

Discrimination Under the New York City Administrative Code

of action, such inconsistent causes of actions are plead alternatively.

Plaintiff, Snickles was an employee of the Defendants, Gabryszak, New

That said employment was serving as Communications Director for

Defendant, former Assemblyman, Gabryszak.

That as Communications Director, Plaintiff, Snickles worked on a daily

basis with Defendant, Gabryszak and handled all communications, scheduling,

That Plaintiff, Snickles's immediate supervisor, was Defendant, Adam

Plaintiff Snickles's tenure

During her employment with Defendants, Gabryszak, New York State

Said conduct included, but was not

physical touching, subjecting Plaintiff to sexual jokes, comments and

Plaintiff was sexually harassed by Defendant Gabryszak because she is a

Plaintiff objected to the aforesaid conduct and complained of it to her

immediate supervisor, Defendant, Locher.

By virtue of her complaints to the above-mentioned individual, Defendants,

Despite her complaints to the above-mentioned individual, Defendants,

Because of the refusal of her supervisor to take corrective or remedial

Such conduct created an offensive, intimidating and hostile work

Since Defendants, former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis

While employed by Assemblyman, Gabryszak, Plaintiff earned a base

Because of the sexual harassment suffered by Plaintiff, she was forced to

Workers' Compensation remedies are not applicable to the Plaintiff.

That the conduct of former New York State Assemblyman, Dennis

In June, 2013, in the Assemblyman's office, the Assemblyman told Plaintiff

In June, 2013, as Plaintiff was walking in a parade with the Assemblyman

I told you that you could stay at my place".

boyfriend and mother in tears.

for a roundtable event.

She advised the Assemblyman that she was going to be

On numerous occasions in August 2013, the Assemblyman regularly told

Plaintiff and a co-worker that they wear bikinis to his events.

Between September 18, 2013 and September 21, 2013, Plaintiff

At the same lunch meeting, the Assemblyman made numerous sexual

In October, 2014, Plaintiff met the Assemblyman's Chief of Staff, Adam

Plaintiff then scheduled a meeting with the

scheduled meeting, but he failed to do so.

That throughout Plaintiff's employment with the Assemblyman, she had a

That throughout Plaintiff's employment with the Assemblyman, she also

employment with the Assemblyman.

Defendant Gabryszak demonstrated a pattern of intentional, malicious and

Defendant Gabryszak used his position as Assemblyman to sexually

Defendant Gabryszak's behavior began in August, 2007 against his Part