Wiley V SUNY Plattsburgh Et Al

Case 5:00-at-99999 Document 150 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
J.W. WILEY, Ed.D, JURY DEMANDED
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Civil Action No:
-vs- 18-CV-
SUNY PLATTSBURGH, JOHN ETTLING, as aider

and abettor, BUTTERFLY BLAISE, as aider and abettor,
VRINDA KUMAR, as aider and abettor, and SUNY
PLATTSBURGH STUDENT ASSOCIATION, as aider
and abettor,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PLAINTIFF, J.W. Wiley, Ed.D, by and through his attorneys, Satter Law Firm, PLLC, as
and for his Complaint against defendants SUNY Plattsburgh, John Ettling, Butterfly Blaise,
Vrinda Kumar and SUNY Plattsburgh Student Association, alleges and states as follows:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 as this action
arises under the First Amendment to the Constitution and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and, therefore, involves the
resolution of a federal question. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §1343(a) and 42 U.S.C. §1983 as this action seeks to redress the deprivation of federal
civil rights under color of state law.
2. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s state law claims (N.Y. Exec.
L. §296; N.Y. Civ. L. §75-b) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367 as they arise from the same common
nucleus of operative facts as do his federal claims and are so interrelated with the federal claims
as to make supplemental jurisdiction appropriate.
1
3. Venue lies properly within the United States District Court for the Northern District of
New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b) because all or a substantial number of events or
omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in the County of Clinton, State of New York.
PARTIES
4. Plaintiff J.W. Wiley, Ed.D [“plaintiff” or “Dr. Wiley”] is an African American male
who was employed by defendant SUNY Plattsburgh from September 1, 2000 until his
termination on or about June 22, 2018. Dr. Wiley is domiciled in Clinton County, New York.
5. Defendant SUNY Plattsburgh is a four-year, public university in the State University
of New York system operating a campus in Clinton County, New York. SUNY Plattsburgh has
approximately 5,300 undergraduate and 340 graduate students and it employs more than 500
academic and other employees. SUNY Plattsburgh receives federal financial assistance, which it
relies upon to fund university operations and programs.
6. Defendant John Ettling, Ph.D, [“President Ettling”] was appointed President of SUNY
Plattsburgh in June 2004. Upon information and belief, President Ettling resides in Clinton
County, New York.
7. Defendant Butterfly Blaise [“Ms. Blaise”] was hired by SUNY Plattsburgh in July
2015 as SUNY Plattsburgh’s Title IX Coordinator. Upon information and belief, Ms. Blaise
resides in Clinton County, New York.
8. Defendant Vrinda Kumar [“Ms. Kumar”] was an undergraduate student at SUNY
Plattsburgh from 2014-2018. Ms. Kumar served as president of the SUNY Plattsburgh Student
Association from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017. Before serving as the Student
Association president, she was its vice president of academic affairs. In the fall semester of the
2017-2018 academic year, Ms. Kumar enrolled in a class taught by Dr. Wiley. The following
2
spring she held an internship at SUNY Plattsburgh’s Title IX Office. Upon information and
belief, Ms. Kumar is currently a SUNY Plattsburgh graduate student residing in Clinton County.
9. Defendant SUNY Plattsburgh Student Association [“Student Association” or “S.A.”]
is a student-run organization governed by elected executive council members and charged with
voicing the concerns and interests of the student body. Funded by student fees, the Student
Association is also tasked with providing students a variety of campus-wide events and activities.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
10. In September 2000, Dr. Wiley commenced employment at SUNY Plattsburgh as its
Director of the Center of Diversity, Pluralism and Inclusion [“CDPI”]. This was an
administrative, non-tenure track position.
11. Commencing in 2001, Dr. Wiley began teaching one or two courses a year, initially
in the Philosophy Department and later in the Interdisciplinary Studies Department. This
teaching was in addition to Dr. Wiley’s administrative responsibilities.
12. In November, 2004 Lynda Ames, Ph.D [“Dr. Ames”], then Title IX Coordinator and
Professor in SUNY Plattsburgh’s Sociology Department, informed Dr. Wiley that an informal
sexual harassment complaint had been filed against him by a student in the Gender and Women’s
Studies [“GWS”] Department.
13. The student, who had taken several classes with, and worked as a teaching assistant
for Dr. Wiley during the 2003-2004 academic year, had the option to move the complaint from
an informal to a formal process. The student elected not to move the complaint to the formal
process.
14. Dr. Wiley denied the allegations in the 2004 informal complaint. He was not
afforded a hearing regarding; nor were any claims of sexual harassment substantiated.
3
15. At some point after the informal complaint in 2004, rumors began to circulate around
the SUNY Plattsburgh campus, accusing Dr. Wiley of being a sexual predator.
16. Upon information and belief, the genesis of the sexual predator rumors was the GWS
Department at SUNY Plattsburgh, at that time operating under the direction of GWS adjunct
Professor Erin Mitchell, Ph.D [“Dr. Mitchell”].
17. Several years later, in November 2009, Dr. Mitchell, a woman with no prior
knowledge of, nor relationship with, Dr. Wiley, posted derogatory, salacious and false comments
on Dr. Wiley’s blog including, inter alia, reference to his supposed “widespread reputation for
disrespect towards, harassment of, and sexually predatory behaviors against women...” Further,
Dr. Mitchell wrote on his blog that certain comments from Dr. Wiley “distracts us from your
more insidious, and infamous, misogyny.”
18. While Dr. Mitchell later posted an apology for “impetuously and inappropriately”
attacking Dr. Wiley’s reputation, the damage had been done.
19. Soon thereafter, the previous rumors that Dr. Wiley was a sexual predator resurfaced,
more virulent than ever.
20. For instance, as part of the curriculum for his course “Romance, Sex, Love &
Marriage” [“RSLM”], Dr. Wiley had his students view a film clip during class.
21. Two students in the class engaged in a heated discussion regarding the film clip,
which required Dr. Wiley to verbally reprimand one of the students for making inappropriate
comments. The student who was reprimanded was the executive vice president of the Student
Association.
22. Out of the 45 students in the RSLM class, two filed a complaint against Dr. Wiley,
claiming, without basis, that his use of the clip made them question whether Dr. Wiley would
4
“find any fault with pressuring his current female students to have sex with him.” Both students
were S.A. executive officers and minored in GWS studies.
23. In support of the students’ complaint, Professor Simona Sharoni, Ph.D [“Dr.
Sharoni”], then Chair of GWS, and Dr. Mitchell played the film clip and/or discussed same in
their separate classes, providing harsh criticism of Dr. Wiley and his use of the clip.
24. On or about February 15, 2010, Dr. Ames, in her role as Title IX Coordinator, was
assigned to investigate the students’ complaint which alleged that, by showing the clip, Dr.
Wiley had created a hostile environment in the classroom.
25. On February 18, 2010, Dr. Wiley contacted President Ettling and requested that Dr.
Ames be removed from the investigation as he feared that her involvement with the informal
complaint in 2004 and her close affiliation with the GWS Department would result in a biased
investigation.
26. In this same communication with President Ettling, Dr. Wiley stressed that the
unsubstantiated allegation from 2004 “lingered with certain people, who in actuality should not
have been in the know at all.”
27. Dr. Wiley also alleged that Drs. Ames, Mitchell and Sharoni were working in tandem
to undermine his reputation by labeling him, based on his race and gender, with the historically
and statistically inaccurate, yet destructive, stereotype and behavior perpetrating the “Myth of the
Black Rapist.”
28. President Ettling failed to respond to Dr. Wiley’s request for a different investigator,
to take any affirmative step to address the sexual predator rumors or to investigate Dr. Wiley’s
allegations of harassment based on his gender and race.
5
29. After an investigation by Dr. Ames, the students’ complaint regarding the film clip
was found to be baseless.
30. In March 2010, Dr. Wiley made a second request to President Ettling, asking that he
examine the relationship between Drs. Ames, Mitchell and Sharoni, the GWS Department, and
the false accusations and rumors that continued stemming from the baseless and discriminatory
investigation.
31. As with the prior request, President Ettling took no action relative to the rumors even
though Dr. Wiley complained expressly that the circumstances had created a hostile work
environment related to his race and gender.
32. Notwithstanding the aforementioned rumors, Dr. Wiley was highly successful as
SUNY Plattsburgh’s Director of CDPI. In fact, Dr. Wiley had gained a reputation as a
prominent advocate and public speaker, resulting in a number of consulting and keynote
speaking opportunities throughout the U.S. and Canada, including, but not limited to, events for
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals; New York State Nurses Association; Canadian Association of
Principles; University of Notre Dame; Los Angeles County Fire Department; National Center for
Atmospheric Research; United States Department of Homeland Security; Midwest Athletic
Conference; University of San Francisco Medical Center; and Princeton Junior Scholars
Institute.
33. On November 3, 2015, due largely to his successes as CDPI Director, Dr. Wiley was
appointed as SUNY Plattsburgh’s Chief Diversity Officer [“CDO”]. He fulfilled both the CDPI
and CDO roles simultaneously until his June 22, 2018 termination. Since his termination, Dr.
Wiley’s personal and professional reputation has been affected and he has lost multiple
consulting opportunities.
6
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
34. In fall 2017, defendant Vrinda Kumar, a SUNY Plattsburgh student and then Student
Association president, enrolled and participated in one of Dr. Wiley’s classes.
35. At some point near the semester’s end, Ms. Kumar asked Dr. Wiley for a personal
reference, which he provided in January, 2018. Contemporaneously, Ms. Kumar obtained an
internship in SUNY Plattsburgh’s Title IX Office.
36. Through her internship, Ms. Kumar worked closely with SUNY Plattsburgh’s Title
IX Coordinator, defendant Butterfly Blaise. Like her predecessor Lynda Ames, Ms. Blaise also
serves as a Professor in the GWS Department.
37. On or about February 13, 2018, Ms. Kumar approached Kristie Gonyea, a SUNY
Plattsburgh staff member and Dr. Wiley’s former Office Assistant.
38. Ms. Kumar asked Ms. Gonyea personally invasive questions, including whether Ms.
Gonyea had ever been sexually harassed by Dr. Wiley.
39. When Ms. Gonyea questioned why Ms. Kumar was making these inquiries, Ms.
Kumar responded that they were to support “research” she was conducting and asked her to
“keep this between us.”
40. At no time did Ms. Kumar identify herself as a Title IX intern; nor did she mention
whether she was seeking information related to an authorized Title IX investigation.
41. Upon information and belief, Ms. Kumar’s questioning had nothing to do with any
“research” nor was it prompted by any recent complaint; rather, Ms. Kumar’s was gathering
information to discredit and harm Dr. Wiley’s personal and professional reputation.
7
42. On February 15, two days later, Ms. Gonyea revealed the interaction with Ms.
Kumar to Dr. Wiley. Ms. Gonyea expressed doubt as to the legitimacy of Ms. Kumar’s
“research.”
43. On February 16, the following day, Dr. Wiley met with President Ettling in his
office to address the basis of Ms. Kumar’s inquiries. Dr. Wiley conveyed his belief that Ms.
Kumar was not conducting any “research,” but instead conducting a Title IX investigation into
the unsubstantiated complaints from years ago.
44. Dr. Wiley communicated to President Ettling that Ms. Blaise likely initiated and/or
encouraged the putative investigation. Dr. Wiley explained further that both Ms. Blaise and her
romantic partner held personal animosity against him revealed, in part, on similar racist and
sexist rumors.
45. Dr. Wiley requested President Ettling to question Ms. Blaise about the putative
investigation and the nature of Ms. Kumar’s involvement.
46. Coincidentally, on or about February 14, 2018, the day before Dr. Wiley learned of
the putative investigation, a racially charged incident surfaced on the SUNY Plattsburgh campus.
The incident stemmed from a student’s public SnapChat post, which read “Lynching Niggers
Tonight.”
47. In response to the foregoing, SUNY Plattsburgh administrators held an open forum
for students, faculty and staff to discuss the incident. At the conclusion of the forum, the
administration, including Dr. Wiley and President Ettling, met for several hours to discuss how
to address the incident, including an amendment to the Student Code of Conduct.
48. The next day, February 15, members of Black Onyx, a student group advocating for
racial justice, organized protests in response to the incident. The protests included a campus
8
march to the Clinton County District Attorney’s Office and to President Ettling’s home. The
student protesters called for the resignation of several senior administrators.
49. At some point that day, the Student Association met with Black Onyx members and
other students to propose a “no confidence” vote for select administrators. Apparently at the
Student Association’s insistence, the no confidence proposals included Dr. Wiley.
50. Later that night, SUNY Plattsburgh held another public forum to address the incident
and the administration’s response. The forum was attended by approximately 700 people
(students, faculty and staff), including defendants Ettling, Blaise and Kumar.
51. Members of the Student Association read the no confidence resolutions before the
crowd. Following the readings, those in attendance were offered an “open mic” opportunity to
speak.
52. During the “open mic” opportunity, in support of Dr. Wiley, several students urged
removing him from the “no confidence” proposals. It was at that stage when student Nelly
Delacruz spoke in reference to Dr. Wiley, saying “I would like to have a Chief Diversity Officer
that I haven’t heard disrespects women.”
53. Immediately following Ms. Delacruz’s comment, there was stunned silence in the
room as the comment diverted the debate from legitimate concerns of campus racism to salacious
and unfounded rumors about Dr. Wiley.
54. Understandably upset by Ms. Delacruz’ comment, Dr. Wiley rose and spoke in his
own defense. Specifically, he communicated that there had never been “anything on the books
about” him. Nonetheless, Dr. Wiley acknowledged he had long been the subject of rumors.
55. Following Dr. Wiley’s rebuttal, Ms. Blaise stood up and made several provocative
statements before encouraging attendees to come forward with allegations against Dr. Wiley.
9
56. Ms. Blaise added that a “friendship…would not deter [her] from doing the ‘right
thing,’” and “I’m not here to make friends,” before declaring to the audience that she “wo[uldn’t]
sit quietly while survivors are being silenced.” The declarations implied that Dr. Wiley was
somehow “silencing” non-existent “survivors.”
57. President Ettling attended the forum and witnessed Ms. Blaise’s statements.
58. Days later, on February 19, a flyer disparaging Dr. Wiley was posted in bathrooms in
the campus Student Union. The flyer read, in part, “We need a chief diversity officer who can
protect us. But how can you do that when you sexually harass us?” The flyer appeared to be in
response to Ms. Blaise’s solicitations and public comments regarding Dr. Wiley.
59. On February 20, Dr. Wiley met with President Ettling and complained again that
defendants Blaise and Kumar were abusing their Title IX positions. Dr. Wiley also reiterated his
concerns about SUNY Plattsburgh’s failure to investigate previous baseless complaints.
60. President Ettling claimed he had discussed the matter with Ms. Blaise, who asserted
she knew nothing of Ms. Kumar’s involvement. Dr. Wiley then asked President Ettling if he
believed Ms. Blaise, to which he responded, “Yes. Like I believe you, J.W.”
61. Dr. Wiley asked—unequivocally—whether he was currently under investigation, to
which Ettling responded “No.” President Ettling added that he would not allow Ms. Blaise to
conduct an investigation because of her “inability to be objective.”
62. Curiously, just weeks earlier, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Third Department, issued its decision in Jacobson v. Butterfly Blaise, et al., Case No.: 524159
(Jan. 11, 2018), vacating SUNY Plattsburgh’s expulsion of a male student accused of sexual
misconduct. The Third Department based its decision, in part, on Ms. Blaise’s “egregious” fact-
finding errors during the investigation and hearing.
10
63. Upon information and belief, despite Ms. Blaise’s recent and well-documented
abuses of Title IX duties, President Ettling questioned perfunctorily, if at all, Ms. Blaise about
her actions and Ms. Kumar’s involvement.
64. The next day, on February 21, 2018, Dr. Wiley again complained to President Ettling
about defendants Blaise and Kumar and the baseless rumors about him. Dr. Wiley further
complained that the Title IX Office had become inappropriately associated with members of the
GWS Department and the Student Association.
65. Notably, Dr. Wiley conveyed that he was seeking legal counsel and would consider a
lawsuit if the matter was not addressed adequately.
66. On the morning of February 22, 2018, Dr. Wiley posted on Facebook a statement
rebutting the salacious allegations against him. He further suggested taking legal action against
SUNY Plattsburgh and President Ettling.
67. Later that afternoon, President Ettling commented in-person to Dr. Wiley, “I saw
your post. Tone it down, J.W.” Again, Dr. Wiley expressed his concerns about Ms. Blaise, the
Student Association and SUNY Plattsburgh’s investigatory practices. He defended that the post
was his attempt to rebut the public accusations against his personal character and not simply his
role as SUNY Plattsburgh’s CDO.
68. On or about March 8, 2018, President Ettling notified Dr. Wiley in writing that he
was under investigation. As a result, Dr. Wiley was placed on alternate assignment, barred from
being on campus, stripped of all supervisory authority, prohibited from teaching and banned
from communicating with individuals on campus, including students, faculty and staff.
69. President Ettling claimed the off-campus assignment was necessary for “the
protection of the campus community” and to facilitate the investigation.
11
70. Curiously, the written notification stated “As you know, an investigation into
complaints under Title IX of the Education Act of 1972 is ongoing,” yet Dr. Wiley had not
previously been informed of such investigation.
71. Upon information and belief, President Ettling reassigned Dr. Wiley to discourage
and/or conceal Dr.Wiley’s complaints about defendants Blaise, Kumar, the Student Association
and SUNY Plattsburgh’s improper investigatory procedures.
72. The inability to be on campus prevented Dr. Wiley from doing his job, further
tarnished Dr. Wiley’s reputation and contributed to rumors of false allegations of sexually
predatory behavior.
73. Upon information and belief, during the ensuing investigation, Ms. Blaise, Ms.
Kumar and the Student Association were actively soliciting women to make allegations against
Dr. Wiley.
74. Upon information and belief Caucasian faculty previously charged with sexual
harassment and sexual misconduct were allowed to continue teaching, pending the outcome of
investigation.
75. On or around April 19, 2018, Dr. Wiley filed a charge with the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission in response to SUNY Plattsburgh’s discriminatory and retaliatory
actions.
76. On June 22, 2018, several months after his off-campus reassignment, Dr. Wiley
received a letter from President Ettling, terminating his employment. The letter provided no
explanation or rationale for the discharge.
12
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION - TITLE IX GENDER DISCRIMINATION

(Against all defendants)
(20 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.)
(Selective Enforcement)
77. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation set
forth in Paragraphs 1 through 76 above as if fully set forth herein.
78. At all relevant times, SUNY Plattsburgh was receiving Federal financial assistance
as contemplated by Title IX, 20 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.
79. Title IX, 20 U.S.C. §1681(a) states that
no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefit of, or be subjected to discrimination under
any education program or activity receiving federal assistance...
80. At all relevant times, Dr. Wiley was a member of a protected class as contemplated
by Title IX. He was also qualified for the positions he held at SUNY Plattsburgh.
81. Dr. Wiley was the subject of a Title IX investigation for alleged sexual harassment
while employed by SUNY Plattsburgh.
82. The Title IX investigation was conducted in an environment tainted by anti-male sex
bias generated by the SUNY Plattsburgh GWS Department.
83. As a result of this bias, males accused of sexual misconduct on the SUNY
Plattsburgh campus are historically and systematically found guilty, regardless of the evidence
presented.
84. As a result of this bias, SUNY Plattsburgh took proactive steps to encourage women
to file complaints against Dr. Wiley.
85. The investigation was spearheaded by Title IX Coordinator Butterfly Blaise who had
been identified previously as having an “inability to be objective” relative to Dr. Wiley.
13
86. As a result of the ongoing investigation, Dr. Wiley was banned from the SUNY
Plattsburgh campus, removed from his supervisory duties, placed on alternative assignment and
subsequently terminated.
87. The severity of Dr. Wiley’s punishment was due to his gender and reflected SUNY
Plattsburgh’s intent to appease campus activists who demanded his removal based on vindictive
accusations.
88. Dr. Wiley was subjected to discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX
as the decision to initiate the investigation, and the resulting discipline, was affected by and/or
was motivated by, his gender and related gender bias.
89. By the foregoing, defendants violated 20 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION - TITLE IX GENDER DISCRIMINATION

(Against all defendants)
(20 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.)
(Erroneous Outcome)
90. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation set
forth in Paragraphs 1 through 76 above as if fully set forth herein.
91. At all relevant times, SUNY Plattsburgh was receiving federal funding, as
contemplated by Title IX, 20 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.
92. Title IX, 20 U.S.C. §1681(a) states that
no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefit of, or be subjected to discrimination under
any education program or activity receiving federal assistance...
93. Title IX is implemented through the Code of Federal Regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part
106.
14
94. 34 C.F.R. §106.8(b) provides:
...a recipient shall adopt and publish grievance procedures providing for prompt
and equitable resolution of student and employee complaints alleging any action
which would be prohibited by this part.
95. At all relevant times, Dr. Wiley was a member of a protected class as contemplated
by Title IX. He was also qualified for the positions he held at SUNY Plattsburgh.
96. Dr. Wiley was the subject of a Title IX investigation for alleged sexual harassment
while employed by SUNY Plattsburgh.
97. The Title IX investigation was conducted in an environment tainted by anti-male sex
bias generated by the SUNY Plattsburgh Gender and Women’s Studies Department.
98. During its Title IX investigation, SUNY Plattsburgh failed to follow federal Title IX
regulations and its own Title IX procedures intended to protect the rights of the accused.
99. Anti-male gender bias was the motivating factor behind SUNY Plattsburgh’s
intentional disregard of its own Title IX procedure and federal Title IX regulations aimed at
protecting the rights of the accused.
100. As result of this bias, allegations of the female accusers were not subject to
challenge.
101. The flawed investigation resulted in an erroneous presumption that Dr. Wiley was
guilty of the allegations.
102. As a result of the erroneous presumption, Dr. Wiley was banned from the SUNY
Plattsburgh campus, removed from his supervisory duties, placed on alternative assignment, and
subsequently terminated.
103. By the foregoing, SUNY Plattsburgh violated 20 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.
15
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION - FIRST AMENDMENT RETALIATION

(Against SUNY Plattsburgh and President Ettling as aider and abettor)
(42 U.S.C. §1983; U.S. Const., amend. I & XIV)
104. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 76 above as if fully set forth herein.
105. As made applicable to the States, the First Amendment of the United States
Constitution prohibits a government agency from interfering with a citizen’s right to petition the
government for redress of grievances.
106. By complaining to defendants SUNY Plattsburgh and President Ettling about
animus motivated by race and gender and about SUNY Plattsburgh’s failures to investigate his
complaints, plaintiff exercised his First Amendment right to petition the government for redress
of grievances.
107. By posting complaints to his public social media account, plaintiff exercised his
First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
108. By engaging in conduct calculated to punish plaintiff for his complaints, such as
removing him from campus and later terminating his employment, SUNY Plattsburgh unlawfully
retaliated against plaintiff in violation of the First Amendment.
109. SUNY Plattsburgh acted intentionally and/or with deliberate indifference to
plaintiff’s fundamental rights.
110. SUNY Plattsburgh’s conduct as set forth in this Complaint has directly and
proximately caused plaintiff to suffer economic and non-economic injuries.
16
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION - N.Y. CIV. SER. L. §75-B RETALIATION

(Against SUNY Plattsburgh)
(N.Y. Civ. Ser. L. §75-b)
112. As a public employee, plaintiff was an intended beneficiary of N.Y. Civ. L. §75-b.
113. Pursuant to N.Y. Civ. Ser. L. §75-b, SUNY Plattsburgh owes a statutorily-imposed
duty to refrain from reassigning, dismissing or otherwise taking adverse action against
employees for complaining, in good faith, about improper governmental action.
114. Improper governmental action includes any action undertaken that violates a
federal, state or local law, rule or regulation.
115. Plaintiff complained repeatedly to SUNY Plattsburgh about its failure to adequately
investigate baseless harassment claims against him.
116. Plaintiff complained to SUNY Plattsburgh that he reasonably believed Ms. Blaise
abused her Title IX duties.
117. SUNY Plattsburgh’s suspension and subsequent discharge of plaintiff because of
his complaints is an adverse employment action constituting improper governmental action.
118. By the foregoing, SUNY Plattsburgh violated N.Y. Civ. Ser. L. §75-b.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION - FEDERAL GENDER DISCRIMINATION

(42 U.S.C. §2000e-2)
17
120. SUNY Plattsburgh subjected plaintiff to a hostile working environment permeated
with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that was sufficiently severe or pervasive so
as to alter the conditions of his employment and create an abusive working environment.
121. The hostile working environment had a causal connection to plaintiff’s gender.
122. Plaintiff complained repeatedly to SUNY Plattsburgh about the hostile working
environment.
123. By failing to properly address plaintiff’s complaints, SUNY Plattsburgh condoned
and approved the hostile and discriminatory behavior.
124. By the foregoing, SUNY Plattsburgh violated 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION - FEDERAL RACE DISCRIMINATION

(42 U.S.C. §2000e-2)
with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule and insult that was sufficiently severe or pervasive so
as to alter the conditions of his employment and created an abusive working environment.
127. The hostile working environment had a causal connection to plaintiff’s race, as
implied if not expressed by the perpetuation of the rumor of Dr. Wiley as sexually predatory.
environment. By failing to properly address plaintiff’s complaints, SUNY Plattsburgh condoned
129. By the foregoing, SUNY Plattsburgh violated 42 U.S.C. §2000e
18
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION - FEDERAL UNLAWFUL RETALIATION

(42 U.S.C. §2000e-3)
and approved the hostile and retaliatory behavior.
133. Plaintiff’s termination was an adverse employment action causally connected to
plaintiff’s complaints about race and gender discrimination.
134. By the foregoing, SUNY Plattsburgh violated 42 U.S.C. §2000e.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION - STATE GENDER DISCRIMINATION

(N.Y. Exec. L. §296)
137. The hostile working environment had a causal connection to plaintiff’s gender.
19
139. By the foregoing, SUNY Plattsburgh violated N.Y. Exec. L. §296.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION - STATE RACE DISCRIMINATION

(N.Y. Exec. L. §296)
142. The hostile working environment had a causal connection to plaintiff’s race, as
implied if not suggested by the perpetuation of the rumor of Dr. Wiley as sexually predatory.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION - STATE UNLAWFUL RETALIATION

(N.Y. Exec. L. §296)
20
and approved the hostile and retaliatory behavior.
148. Plaintiff’s termination was an adverse employment action causally connected to
plaintiff’s complaints about race and gender discrimination.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION - AIDING AND ABETTING RACE AND GENDER

DISCRIMINATION
(Against President Ettling as aider and abettor)
(N.Y. Exec. L. §296[6])
151. President Ettling participated in discriminatory and retaliatory conduct by failing to
adequately respond to plaintiff’s complaints about discrimination based on race and/or gender
and by initiating adverse employment actions against plaintiff, including a biased and bad faith
investigation, administrative leave and/or suspension and termination.
152. President Ettling aided and abetted SUNY Plattsburgh’s discriminatory and
retaliatory acts against plaintiff.
153. By the foregoing, defendant Ettling violated N.Y. Exec. L. §296(6).
21
TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION - AIDING AND ABETTING RACE AND GENDER

DISCRIMINATION
(Against Ms. Blaise as aider and abettor)
(N.Y. Exec. L. §296[6])
155. Ms. Blaise participated in discriminatory conduct by initiating an unlawful and
biased investigation into plaintiff because of his gender and/or race.
156. Ms. Blaise promoted baseless and discriminatory rumors about plaintiff and
solicited individuals, including students, faculty and staff, to bring complaints against plaintiff.
157. Ms. Blaise aided and abetted SUNY Plattsburgh’s discriminatory and retaliatory
acts against plaintiff.
158. By the foregoing, Ms. Blaise violated N.Y. Exec. L. §296(6).
THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION - AIDING AND ABETTING RACE AND GENDER

DISCRIMINATION
(Against Ms. Kumar as aider and abettor)
(N.Y. Exec. L. §296[6])
160. Ms. Kumar participated in discriminatory conduct by initiating an unlawful and
biased investigation into plaintiff because of his gender and/or race.
161. Ms. Kumar promoted baseless and discriminatory rumors about plaintiff and
solicited individuals, including students, faculty and staff, to bring complaints against plaintiff.
162. Ms. Kumar aided and abetted SUNY Plattsburgh’s discriminatory and retaliatory
acts against plaintiff.
163. By the foregoing, Ms. Kumar violated N.Y. Exec. L. §296(6).
22
FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION - AIDING AND ABETTING RACE AND

GENDER DISCRIMINATION
(Against Student Association as aider and abettor)
(N.Y. Exec. L. §296[6])
165. Defendant Student Association participated in discriminatory conduct by promoting
racist and sexist stereotypes about plaintiff and by encouraging SUNY Plattsburgh to take
adverse employment actions against plaintiff because of his race and/or gender.
166. Defendant Student Association promoted baseless and discriminatory rumors about
plaintiff and solicited individuals, including students, faculty and staff, to bring complaints
against plaintiff.
167. Defendant Student Association aided and abetted SUNY Plattsburgh’s
discriminatory and retaliatory acts against plaintiff.
168. By the foregoing, defendant Student Association violated N.Y. Exec. L. §296(6).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court:
A. Assume jurisdiction of this action;
B. Empanel a jury to hear all claims;
C. Adjudge and declare defendants’ actions, policies and practices as alleged herein to be
unlawful;
D. Reinstate plaintiff with lost wages and all other compensation denied or lost to
plaintiff by reason of defendants’ unlawful actions in an amount to be proven at trial;
E. Award compensatory damages for plaintiff’s personal and professional reputation,
emotional pain and suffering and lost economic opportunities in an amount to be proven at trial;
23
F. Award punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
G. Award reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 20 U.S.C. §1681; 42 U.S.C. §1988; 42
U.S.C. §2000e-5(k); N.Y. Civ. Ser. L. §75-B; and N.Y. Exec. L. §296.
H. Award such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
DATED: November 30, 2018

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Mimi C. Satter

Mimi C. Satter, Esq.
Bar Roll No.: 102525
Patrick R. Blood, Esq.
Bar Roll No.: 519910
SATTER LAW FIRM, PLLC
Attorneys for Plaintiff
217 S. Salina Street, 6th Floor
Syracuse, New York 13202
Tel.: (315) 471-0405
Fax: (315) 471-7849
24

Wiley V SUNY Plattsburgh Et Al

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

Wiley V SUNY Plattsburgh Et Al

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 5:00-at-99999 Document 150 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 24

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SUNY PLATTSBURGH, JOHN ETTLING, as aider

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

civil rights under color of state law.

as to make supplemental jurisdiction appropriate.

5. Defendant SUNY Plattsburgh is a four-year, public university in the State University

relies upon to fund university operations and programs.

County, New York.

resides in Clinton County, New York.

8. Defendant Vrinda Kumar [“Ms. Kumar”] was an undergraduate student at SUNY

9. Defendant SUNY Plattsburgh Student Association [“Student Association” or “S.A.”]

administrative, non-tenure track position.

teaching was in addition to Dr. Wiley’s administrative responsibilities.

Studies [“GWS”] Department.

Professor Erin Mitchell, Ph.D [“Dr. Mitchell”].

more insidious, and infamous, misogyny.”

attacking Dr. Wiley’s reputation, the damage had been done.

more virulent than ever.

were S.A. executive officers and minored in GWS studies.

Wiley had created a hostile environment in the classroom.

have been in the know at all.”

allegations of harassment based on his gender and race.

was found to be baseless.

environment related to his race and gender.

Pfizer Pharmaceuticals; New York State Nurses Association; Canadian Association of

Atmospheric Research; United States Department of Homeland Security; Midwest Athletic

Association president, enrolled and participated in one of Dr. Wiley’s classes.

reference, which he provided in January, 2018. Contemporaneously, Ms. Kumar obtained an

internship in SUNY Plattsburgh’s Title IX Office.

serves as a Professor in the GWS Department.

Plattsburgh staff member and Dr. Wiley’s former Office Assistant.

Gonyea had ever been sexually harassed by Dr. Wiley.

“keep this between us.”

whether she was seeking information related to an authorized Title IX investigation.

the unsubstantiated complaints from years ago.

investigation and the nature of Ms. Kumar’s involvement.

to address the incident, including an amendment to the Student Code of Conduct.

student protesters called for the resignation of several senior administrators.

Student Association’s insistence, the no confidence proposals included Dr. Wiley.

that I haven’t heard disrespects women.”

and unfounded rumors about Dr. Wiley.

somehow “silencing” non-existent “survivors.”

concerns about SUNY Plattsburgh’s failure to investigate previous baseless complaints.

61. Dr. Wiley asked—unequivocally—whether he was currently under investigation, to

conduct an investigation because of her “inability to be objective.”

finding errors during the investigation and hearing.

her actions and Ms. Kumar’s involvement.

GWS Department and the Student Association.

lawsuit if the matter was not addressed adequately.

SUNY Plattsburgh and President Ettling.

role as SUNY Plattsburgh’s CDO.

protection of the campus community” and to facilitate the investigation.

previously been informed of such investigation.

and SUNY Plattsburgh’s improper investigatory procedures.

Opportunity Commission in response to SUNY Plattsburgh’s discriminatory and retaliatory

explanation or rationale for the discharge.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION - TITLE IX GENDER DISCRIMINATION

forth in Paragraphs 1 through 76 above as if fully set forth herein.

as contemplated by Title IX, 20 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.

79. Title IX, 20 U.S.C. §1681(a) states that

while employed by SUNY Plattsburgh.

bias generated by the SUNY Plattsburgh GWS Department.