Escaped Murderers Matt and Sweat Treated Better By NYSDOCS than BLACK female Guard?

                        

On December 1, 1986, I was appointed to a Correctional Officer Trainee’s position with New York State Department of Correctional Services My starting salary was $ 18,017.00 a year. Prior to my appointment to the Correctional Officer title I had to undergo a background check and I was given physical and psychological examinations by New York State Department of Civil Service.  I passed both examinations and was deemed physically and psychologically fit to work as a Correctional Officer.

On July 5, 1996, I filed a formal complaint with New York State Department of Human Rights. I filed the complaint after experiencing and complaining of discrimination for three years to no avail at Albion Correctional Facility. 

                                         

                  

On July 8, 1996, I amended the New York State Division of Human Rights complaint to include the following allegations:  Allegation #7 is hereby amended as follows:  I informed A. Andrews, Mr. Hennenberg, G. Berbary, Lt. Lucas, Lt. Embury, and Captain J. Sherlock of Sgt. Reed’s continued pattern of treating me differently that he treats white male and female officers. Those respondent supervisors were made aware of Sgt. Reed’s actions both verbally and in writing.  The dates of the written complaints and the request to have the treatment terminated were August 26, 1995, August 30, 1995, December 3, 1995, January 7, 1996, and January 31, 1996.  In spite of my efforts to have the situation corrected, nothing was done by anyone to correct it. Allegation #8 is hereby added as follows:  Based on the foregoing I charge the respondent with an unlawful act of discrimination relating to employment because of my race, color and sex in violation of Section 296 of the New York State Human Rights Law.

In the following declaration filed in support of the Defendant's perjured summary judgment motion Jerald Goncalves states that I made numerous complaints in 1994, 1995, and 1996.

On July 26, 1996, James Berbary addressed my New York State Division of Human Rights Complaint and my depression/stress workers’ compensation claim in a memorandum to Jerry Goncalves.

On August 5, 1996, my psychiatrist examined me. At the end of my appointment he gave me a doctor’s note that cleared me to return to work the next day without any restrictions or limitations. 
                                          

                    
On August 6, 1996, a month after I filed my complaint with New York State Division of Human Rights, I returned to work at Albion. I was dressed in full uniform and I was willing and able to work. I looked good and I felt great.

I had been absent from work for seven months because of work related stress, anxiety, and depression. According to my psychiatrist my emotional illness was caused by Sergeant Reed's continued discrimination and his supervisor's failure to take action to end the discrimination.  I was out of work without pay. 

I felt much better and was excited to be back at work. Based on my psychiatrist determination and the paperwork he completed I filed a stress, anxiety, depression worker's compensation claim. The claim was opened and still pending when I returned to work on August 6, 1996. 


                                     

After I signed the front gate logbook the Front Gate officer buzzed the gate open and I walked to the Administration Building of the prison. I reported to the chart office and submitted my cleared to return to work note from my doctor to the Chart Sergeant. After leaving the chart office I walked to the key room and got my equipment for my bid post of yard recreation.

The equipment included a two-way radio and keys. At 6:45 a.m. I went downstairs for line-up. Immediately after line-up the Chart Sergeant informed me that I had to talk to Shirley Abron in personnel before going to my bid assignment. Abron is an African-American female. I went to her office and she informed me it was possible that I would have to undergo an Employee Health Service examination before I would be allowed to work.

She also told me that Berbary in is official capacity, as Deputy Superintendent of Administration would make the determination if the Employee Health Service examination would be necessary. Shirley instructed me to wait for Deputy Berbary in the civilian break room, which was also located on the second floor down the hall from her office.

While I was waiting for Berbary the Chart Sergeant contacted me by radio and told me that a resource officer was coming to the break room to get the equipment for my Yard Recreation assignment. Shortly after the radio transmission an officer reported to the break room and I gave him my equipment.

At 8:25 a.m. J. Berbary signed the Watch Commander’s logbook and that Sgt. Fasano was on duty as the Administration Building supervisor. At approximately 8:30 a.m. Deputy Berbary came to the break room and instructed me to come to Shirley’s office. In the presence of Shirley Berbary he informed me that in accordance with Section 21.3 of the Civil Service rules that I would have to submit to an Employee Health Service examination. He continued by stating “We are requiring that you be examined by a state doctor before you are allowed to return to work.”

I was very calm after hearing Berbary decision that I would have to be examined by an Employee Health Service physician. I knew that Berbary was acting within his official capacity when he decided that I had to undergo an employee health service examination. I knew this fact because of my experience working in Inmate Grievance Program title at Albion for two and a half years.

As Supervisor of Inmate Grievance Program I was responsible for ensuring that Albion staff including Superintendent Andrews and Deputy Berbary were in compliance with the mandates of correction law and New York State departmental directives. I knew that if a directive or policy stated someone “may” take an action that it was solely up to that person discretion to require that action.

Additionally, Berbary’s decision didn’t cause me any concerns because on May 30, 1995, I was sent home after I returned to Albion from a documented worker related injury.   During the May 30, 1995, incident I also had a doctor’s note that stated that I was cleared to work without any restrictions or limitations.

I thanked Berbary and asked S. Abrons for a copy of the new Council 82 union handbook.  The new security contract was passed and new handbooks issued to union employees during my January 16, 1996 to August 6, 1996, absence from work.

Shirley opened the bottom draw of her desk and attempted to hand me the union handbook. Deputy Berbary grabbed the book from Shirley’s hand and stated” All employees had to get the book from their union.  He told me that he would have C.O. Frost get a handbook for me.

I was surprised when he took the book out of Shirley hand.  Shirley as the Principle Clerk Personnel at Albion had to know the rules for passing out contract books. While waiting for C.O. Frost to bring the union handbook to me, Shirley Abrons and I talked about church and God.

During the time that I was waiting for the handbook Shirley received a telephone call and stated, “Yes she is here.”  I thought that someone was calling her office to speak to me but she didn’t pass the phone to me.

As I sat in Shirley’s office at approximately 8:35 a.m. Correctional Officer Frost who was the Vice President of the local union at Albion came to the office. Frost and other correctional officers at Albion and other NYSDOCS facilities were elected by their fellow officers to serve as officers of the local Counsel 82 union.

Frost gave me a copy of the new union handbook. After I received the handbook from Frost I stood up to leave Shirley’s office. It was at that time that I noticed Sergeant Fasano had entered the doorway.  Fasano informed me that he and Frost had been ordered to escort me out of the facility.

At approximately 8:35 am in shock, disgrace, and bewilderment Frost and Sergeant Fasano escorted me from the Personnel office, downstairs through the administration lobby, and out the front gate of the prison. Shirley Abrons, Correctional Officer Kathy Wilson, the front gate officers, and other Albion employees witnessed this act of humiliation and retaliation.

Officers or any prison staff being escorted out of a New York State correctional facility is a rare event. New York State Department of Correctional Service’s officers are only escorted out of a prison facility by an “officer” of one’s union and a correctional supervisor when that officer is being severely disciplined, suspended, terminated, had sex or an inappropriate relationship with an inmate, and/or charge with the commission of a crime. This fact was confirmed by Sergeant Adamson when I deposed her.

       

             

       
In a January 21, 1997 decision the Worker's Compensation denied my stress claim.  The claim was denied because Albion Correctional Facility disputed the claim and refused to pay it. Additionally, the claim was denied based in part because of the testimony of Deputy Superintendent of  Security Stevens.

                               

                                                               

On March 6, 1997, J. G. Berbary responded to the New York State Division of Human Rights amendment complaint by writing a memorandum to Gerald Goncalves. Berbary doesn't mention the fact that he also ordered Sergeant Fasano and Council 82 Vice President Frost to Escort me out of the prison on August 6, 1996. The reason that he  didn't is  because there wasn't any non-discriminaory or non-retaliatory reason for an officer supervisor (Sergeant) and a union official to escort an  officer out of a New York State prison in 1996. 

On August 6, 1996, I was escorted out Albion prison like an INMATE in retaliation for filing a New York State Division of Human Rights Complaint on July 5, 1996.

         

               VICE PRESIDENT OFFICER FROST EXPLANATION FOR 8/6/96 ESCORT

On March 20, 1997, New York State Division of Human Rights,Julia Day, held a pre-arranged telephone conference requested in her February 25, 1997, letter to Goncalves. In her report she wrote present for the respondent were Goncalves, Deputy Superintendent James Berbary, and Correctional Officer and Council 82 Vice President C. Frost.  

My only crime on August 6, 1996, was the fact that I was Black and had filed a formal complaint alleging discrimination on July 5, 1996. Berbary knew that I had filed a formal complaint with New York State Division of Human Rights.

His retaliatory order occurred eleven days after he wrote a July 26, 1996, memorandum to Gerald Goncalves responding to my Human Rights complaint titled “Vera Richardson.” Additionally, Berbary’s retaliatory order occurred  thirty-three days after I filed my complaint with New York State Division of Human Rights.

It is not necessary to prove employment discrimination in order to win a Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1964, retaliation employment claim. A victim just has to show that they were engaged in protective activity, that their employer was aware of that activity; and that they experience an adverse employment action close to the date of protective activity.

                      Spitzer Perjured Declaration Explanation for August 6, 1996, Escort

        

       BERBARY REPLY DECLARATION "AUGUST 6, 1996 ESCORT ORDER

                 

                    BERBARY DEPOSITION CONTRADICTS HIS DECLARATION

Berbary declaration in support of the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment at number 5 he stated: “As such I directed that Craig Frost, her union representative, be contacted as that he could escort her from the facility.” Deputy Berbary lied in either his sworn declaration or during his deposition because his deposition contradicts his sworn declaration. 

During his deposition I questioned him in reference to his order to have me escorted out of Albion CF on August 6, 1996. In his October 7, 1998, deposition he stated that he requested a union representative to escort me our but that he didn’t specifically request that Frost be contacted to escort me out of the facility. He also testified that he did not order Frost and/or Sgt. Fasano to escort be out of the facility.

   

                   SHIRLEY ABRONS CONFIRMS SERGEANT FASANO'S                                                                   INVOLVEMENT IN ESCORT

My factual claim that Vice President of local Council 82 Vice President C. Frost and Sgt. Fasano escorted me out of Albion is evidentiary supported by the sworn depositional testimony of Shirley Abrons and me.

             

       

         

After being escorted out of the prison I was destroyed emotionally and physically. I felt depressed and hopeless as I drove back home to Rochester in tears.

I could not wrap my mind around the fact that a correctional staff person stole my badge and identification card, Albion supervisors not replace those items especially the identification card although the ID cards are made and replaced by Albion CF Personnel office, and that Berbary ordered Sergeant Fasano and Officer and Council 82 Union Vice President escorted me out of Albion on the first day that I returned to work after being away for seven months suffering from work-related depression and anxiety.

After I was escorted out of Albion on August 6, 1996, I experienced severe back pain. I made an appointment with my personal doctor for physical pain. During my August 26, 1996, appointment my physician determined that I was totally disabled from the three previous physical worker’s compensation injuries which occurred within an eighteen month period.

On August 27, 1996, I received a certified letter from Lee Gould, Director of Personnel.  Gould’s letter stated in part” In accordance with Section 21.3 of the Civil Service rules, a medical examination has been scheduled for you on August 28, 1996, and your psychological examination is scheduled for September 16, 1996.

On August 28, 1996, I reported as ordered to a physical examination by an Employee Health Service physician.  Dr. Raghavan examined me and submitted her medical report to Dr. Ciulla. 

On September 16, 1996, approximately two weeks after my examination by the state consultant Dr. U. Raghavan, a state hired psychiatrist – Dr. Klein, examined me.   After my examination, Dr. Klein also addressed his written report to Dr. Ciulla.  The report listed the Employee Health Service as the referring agency. 

On September 30, 1996, Dr. Richard Ciulla, Medical Director confidential letter which was addressed to Mary Beth Lindsay, Senior Personnel Administrator was received in her office.  The letter in stated in part:  “Based on my review of those evaluations, Ms. Richardson is unable to perform the full duties of a Correction Officer at the present time.  I recommend a reevaluation in 2 months.

On October 3, 1996, I received a phone call from Mary Beth Lindsay. She informed me that based on my previous physical and psychological exams that I had been found unfit to perform the full duties of a Correctional Officer. She also told me the Employee Health Services had scheduled me for another physical examination and that the examination was scheduled for October 5, 1996, in Syracuse, New York

I informed Ms. Lindsay that I had mailed a request for the result of the previous examinations to her on October 1, 1996, and that I would not attend another examination until I received and reviewed those results. Lindsay stated that she hadn’t received my letter.

She promised to mail the medical reports to me via overnight mail if I would sign and fax an authorization form back to her. I agreed and Lindsay faxed me a New York State Department of Civil Service Employee Health Services Authorization for Release and Disclosure of Medical Information form. She marked several areas with *** to indicate areas that I needed to complete on the form. That same day I completed the form and faxed it with a cover sheet to Ms. Lindsay to (518) 485-1995. The cover sheet and the signed Release and Disclosure of Medical Information form was dated stamped received by Employee Health Services on October 3, 1996.

The next day October 4, 1996, I receive copies of Dr. Raghavan and Dr. Klein's medical reports. Dr. Usha Raghavan’s medical report, which was address to Dr. Ciulla stated in part:  “Vera Richardson has history of injury to her back and both shoulders in October 1994.  She injured herself by restraining an inmate when she was at the Albion CF. She has had multiple investigations including x-rays and MRI scan and has had a neurosurgical consultation. She appears to have difficulty getting on and off the exam table.  She has history of anxiety and depression.  She was tearful during the interview. IMPRESSION:  After examining her today I feel that Vera Richardson is not capable of performing the full duties of the position according to the job description.  She should be seen by an orthopedic surgeon to evaluate her low back pain and shoulder pain as there appears to be limited range of motion at these areas, though there is no evidence of atrophy.     Signed Dr. U. Raghavan

Dr. Klein, medical report confirms the fact that Berbary's order to have me escorted out of Albion Correctional Facility casused a recurrence of  major depression and  anxiety.

After I read the medical reports and Dr. Ciulla letter I was alarmed. Ciulla recommended that I be examined in two months. Therefore, November 27, 1996, should have been the earliest date that I should have been re-examined. I telephoned Lindsay and told her that I wasn’t going to attend the October 5, 1996, examination.

   

I viewed New York State Department of Civil Services and Lindsay’s actions as continued hostile work environment behavior, discrimination and retaliation. I also believed that Lindsay was involved in a conspiracy with Albion staff to terminate me.

My belief was based on the facts that Lindsay telephoned me and ordered me to report to an October 5, 1996, medical examination in Syracuse eight days from the September 27, 1996, date of Dr. Ciulla letter stating that he recommends a re-evaluation in two months.  

             TIME FOR GOVERNOR CUOMO to MAKE ME WHOLE

The Supreme Court in Albermale identified two distinct congressional purposes of Title VII. One of those purposes was “to make persons whole for injustices suffered on account of unlawful employment discrimination.” Albermale Paper Co. v Moody, 422 U.S. 418 (1975). 

South Carolina and Alabama governors have called for and/or removed the Confederate flag to correct decades Democrats Senators Chuck Schumer, Kirsten Gillbrand, and 2016 presidental candidate Hillary Clinton can and should request that New York Governor Cuomo make me whole.

As Governor Cuomo should address, investigate, and use an Executive Order if necessary to award me entitled disability retirements benefits. Cuomo can use an executive order or support a bill that will give me entitled disability benefits from the date of my original application.

Other ways that  Governor Cuomo can make me whole from Spitzer's actions: State of New York can pay me back salary for the retaliatory failure of Albion CF staff to interview and/or reinstate me to the July 19, 1996, position of Supervisor of Inmate Grievance Program at Albion CF, and/or paying me the $3,000,000 that I demanded in my Title VII Civil Right Act of 1964 amended lawsuit.

Vera Richardson

Download my $2.99 book  Screwed by Former Governor and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer . This blog entry and my book are perfect tools to have fact based national race conversation. Additionally, you can click on the link and the extended preview to read two perjured declarations of Eliot Spitzer and Jerald Goncalves and the direct evidence that proves it.   

PRAY: President Obama Seizes Charleston Domestic Terrorism Horror and Take Executive Action Against Racism

First of all  I want to thank President Obama for being this nation first African-American President and one the best presidents to occupy the White House.

In this post President Obama is referencing gun violence and gun control. That's a good thing but I also believe that he should siege the Charleston terrorism  moment and finally look racism in the face and not blink. He should discuss, address, and tell nation that he is going to take action to help and protect African-Americans from racism.

                       



   TIME FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA TO TALK ABOUT RACISM AND TAKE ACTION

We can't lose sight that  he can also talk about and do something about the role employment discrimination plays in the cycle of RACISM. I believe President Barack Obama can and should amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1964 again with an Executive Order.  Amending Title VII of CRA 1964 again like he January 2009, for Lilly Ledbetter will prevent one judge from unjustly dismissing Employment Discrimination. Many Title VII case including my case are unjust dismissed based on perjured or flawed summary judgment motions.

Victims of unlawful discrimination shouldn't have their cases unjust dismissed at the district court based on one federal judge absolute authority to unjustly dismiss Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII cases based on summary judgment motions.  Once again President signed an Executive Order for Lilly Ledbetter and women. Will he have the courage to sign another Executive Order for me and other African-Americans employment discrimination victims?

The salutary purpose of summary judgment and the rights of all Americans to fair and equal justice can both be accomplished with a well written and defined amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Amending the Civil Rights Act again would prevent one judge from having the absolute power to grant summary judgment motions that dismiss Title VII (discrimination and retaliation) case.

        
       

  

                              

Vera Richardson

Download OR preview my $2.99 book  Screwed by Former Governor and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer and read more of the 7 perjured declaration and direct evidence that proves it.

This blog entry and my book are perfect tools to have the national race conversation President Obama requested and need to SAVE ObamaCare from Supreme Court RACISM!

President Obama Give Baltimore THUGS and Blacks HOPE with an Executive Order

I believe that the issue of race, the murder of unarmed blacks by the police, and black President Obama makes it the perfect time to PROVE racism exist to America. This blog based on my life and book can be used to prove it.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 needs to be amended again to prevent employers from abusing summary judgment motions. Many employment discrimination and retaliation victims are denied a jury trial and justice when one judge dismiss their lawsuit.

President Obama is the HOPE of African-Americans who's lives appears to have gotten worst since he was elected president of the United States of America. Today African-Americans need jobs and additional protection against unlawful employment discrimination and the Supreme Court of the United States racial bias.

As a race of people who have been victimized for hundreds of years by racism. African-Americans especially our youth need and want real positive changes in our lives. President Obama can help Black people today with an Executive Order to amend Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964.

President Obama has supported and signed bills that have made real changes in the lives of women, the gay community, military families, and Hispanics. He has also engaged in and created headlines when he used the word THUGS during rioting in Baltimore after police officers murdered Freddie Gray.

I am an African-American woman who was unjust terminated by New York State Department of Correctional Services on November 2, 1998, after filing an October 15, 1997, employment discrimination lawsuit. My motion to amend the complaint was granted by the District Court Judge Elfvin to included my retaliatory November 2, 1998 termination.

By amended complaint filed on February 19, 1999, I charged New York State Department of Correctional Service and New York State Department of Civil Service with violating Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act as amended.  I filed my amended lawsuit Pro-Se because my four motions requesting appointment of counsel by the court were denied by district court judge. I also filed the amended complaint without an attorney because attoneys refused my case because the New York State Attorney General was counsel for the defendants.


                 
                                                     PART OF  MY  STORY

I am entitled to Disability Retirement because of Judicial Estoppel. The legal doctrine of Judicial Estoppel means a party is not allowed to present a different legal argument that is contrary to a previous legal argument that results in a favorable decision for that party in another legal proceeding. New York State Departments of Correctional and Civil Services two different positions were successful during my worker’s compensation hearings, my employment discrimination and retaliation lawsuit, and during my disability retirement appeal hearing and final determination..

In November 1996, my doctor determined that I was disabled from physical worker compensation injuries. Since Albion supervisors had placed me on involuntary leave of absence and won’t let me return to work I contacted New York State Department of Civil Service. I made an inquiry with NYS Department of Civil Service about applying for disability retirement. After receiving the applications that they deemed appropriate. On December 6, 1996, after receiving the applications I submitted a Chapter 722 Performance of Duty Disability Retirement application on December 6, 1996 and Section 507-A Disability Retirement (Section 507-A of the Retirement and Social Security Law).

    

On May 22, 1997, I reported to a medical examination by a New York State disability retirement consultant.  After he examined me Dr. Austin R. Leve, M.D., P.C. wrote a five-paged single spaced medical report. On page 5 Leve concluded his  report  with his impression that  I was not disabled and could perform the duties of a correctional officer.

Although Dr. Leve, a doctor hired by the State of New York determined that I was not disabled and that I could perform the full duties of a correctional officer I was continued on involuntary leave of absence. Based on the medical examination of Dr. Leve I should have been taken off of involuntary leave of absence and allowed and/or ordered to return to work.

In a letter of Determination dated June 16, 1997, the Retirement System denied my application for Section 507-a Disability Retirement. Based on the decision that denied me Disability Retirement, I should have been allowed to return to work.  On January 6, 1997, I had been placed on continued involuntary leave of absence by Albion Correctional Facility. I was not allowed to return to my Correctional Officer positon. 

On October 15, 1997, I filed a pro-se Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended employment discrimination lawsuit with jury demand against New York State Department of Corrections, New York State Office of State Comptroller, and New York State Department of Civil Service. I filed the lawsuit Pro Se because I could not get an attorney to take the case.

I also filed motions to precede in Forma Pauperis (Poor Person) and appointment of counsel. In a Decision and Order dated October 28, 1997, United States District Judge Richard J. Arcara granted Forma Pauperis motion and denied my motion of appointment of counsel. 

In  his role as New York State Attorney General Spitzer, "SCREWED" me when he filed seven (7) perjured declarations in federal court to WIN his summary judgement motion.. Based on the perjured declarations my Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII (employment discrimination) case was dismissed and I was denied a JURY TRIAL.

ALL of the declarations on the following docket sheet contained perjured statements and/or contradictions to sworn deposition testimony or direct evidence. The perjured declarations were filed in a federal district court with Spitzer's summary judgment motion. 


                     

I presented direct evidence that proved 7 of the declarations contained perjury to the district court AND the Supreme Court. The perjured declarations of Mike Russo, New York State Assistant Attorney General (who is still employed by NYS AG office), Gerald Goncalves (Hispanic male), Diversity Management, Superintendent Anginell Andrews (African-Amer), Sergeant William Reed (White male), James Berbary (White male), and Deputy Superintendent of Administration, and Lee Gould were filed to deny me justice and a JURY trial.

I also filed sworn declarations in support of my motion for summary judgment and in opposition to the Defendants' summary judgment motion. Attached to my motion were approximately 100 exhibits and the entire transcripts of the deposition testimony of James Berbary, A. Andrews, Sergeant Reed, Shirley Abrons, and Sergeant Adamson.

My filings proved that Berbary, Andrews, and Sergeant Reed lied about their non discriminatory or reataliatory acts. They lied in either their sworn declarations and/or depositions. I should have survived summary judgment as a matter of law once I presented the district court with direct evidence that proved their explanations to be false.

The United States Supreme Court in Reeves v Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc 530 U.S. 133 (2000) stated: “In appropriate circumstances, the trier of fact can reasonably infer from the falsity of the explanation that the employer is dissembling to cover up a discriminatory purpose.  See, e.g., Wright v West, 505 U.S. 277, 296.  

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg in her concurring opinion in Reeves, stated “The Court holds that an employment discrimination plaintiff may survive a summary judgment motion as a matter of law by submitting two categories of evidence: first, evidence establishing a “prima facie case” as that term is used in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v Green 411 U.S. 792, 802, (1973); and second, evidence from which a rational fact finder could conclude that the employer’ proffered explanation for its actions was false.

In July 2005 Jane Wolfe and Allison Gioia both US Justice Department attorneys, reviewed my perjury allegations, the declarations, and the direct evidence that proved it. The United States Justice Department attorneys confirmed the perjury and informed me that they were referring my case to the FBI for an investigation. 

I telephoned the FBI and was told that they could not confirm or deny the fact that my allegations were being investigated because of confidentiality rules. The FBI and United States Justice Department under President George W. Bush leadership did not charge anyone with perjury in my case.

I have exhausted all avenues of obtaining justice including appealing the dismissal to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court's decision not to reverse my case and allow me a jury trial will be viewed in history as a gross miscarriage of justice.

A jury should have decided my retaliatory claims based on the Court's precedent summary judgement rulings in Anderson v Libby Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 255 (1986) Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the fact are "JURY" functions, not those of a "JUDGE," whether he is ruling on a motion for summary judgment or for a direct verdict. The evidence of the nonmovant is to be believed, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor. Adickes, 398 U.S. at 398 U.S. 158-159.




                MY TERMINATION AND LEE GOULD'S PERJURED DECLARATION 

One of the three claims that the Defendants retaliated against me after I filed an October 15, 1997, lawsuit included my retaliatory November 2, 1998, termination. NOTE: It is not necessary to prove employment discrimination in order to win a Title VII employment retaliation claim.

On November 15, 2000, Lee P. Gould, Director of Personnel for New York State Department of Correctional Services signed one of the perjured declaration that was filed in federal court. Lee Gould committed perjury when he stated in his declaration that I was terminated on December 7, 1998. I was terminated at the close of business on November 2, 1998. 

Direct Evidence that Gould lied about the date of my retaliatory firing including his October 26, 1998, letter, NYSDOCS employee change status sheet and Judge Elfvin's District Court Orders. Elfvin was appointed by President Ford and was a Senior Judge and 80 years when I filed my October 15, 1997, lawsuit.

One of the orders denied my motion for a temporary injunction to prevent Gould from terminating me on November 2, 1998. Another order granted my motion to amend my lawsuit to include my November 2, 1998, termination as a retaliatory act.

In an order dated May 25, 2001, now deceased Judge Elfvin, granted the Defendant's summary judgment motion in its entirety. In his ruling on my retaliatory termination, he cited Gould's perjured declaration. "Turning first to plaintiff's claim regarding retaliatory discharge, it is plain that there are no facts in the record upon which such allegation can succeed. Assuming that plaintiff has set forth a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge, she fails to articulate any reason why the proffered justification for terminating her was pretext -viz., that her medical condition rendered her incapable of performing the duties of a correctional officer. 

See Gould Declaration filed November 17, 2000. The evidence amply supports this conclusion and, as will be discussed more fully below, plaintiff’s references to a retaliatory motive behind her discharge based on race and sex are at best, conclusory assertions."

                        

Based on Lee Gould's declarations that contains the LIE that I was terminated on December 7, 1998, his credibility is questionable. Again according to the Supreme Court ruling in Anderson v Libby Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 255 (1986) Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawingof legitimate inferences from the fact are "JURY" functions, not those of a "JUDGE," Therefore, my case should not have been dismissed a JURY should have decided my case.

On August 7, 2001, a Worker's Compensation Board hearing was held in White Plains, NY. Although the hearing was about my three work related accidents and cases I was not present at the hearing. A transcript of the hearing reveals I had been awarded and receiving worker's compensation payments since October 21, 1997,

The transcript of the August 7, 2001, hearing also states in part: " ...carrier to continue payments of $304.17, without prejudice to apportionment, based on $912.52 average weekly wage. 10-21-to date at $304.17 partial disability without prejudice to apportionment.



I got over the initial disappointment that my case was dismissed by the district court. I forced myself to start working on my appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.  I had previously filed three appeal motions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Appeals Court denied each one of my appeals. Although my previous appeals were denied I felt confident that Elfvin’s May 29, 2001, court order would be reversed based of my retaliatory claims and judicial estoppel doctrine.

I believed that after the case was sent back to the District Court I would be able to get a lawyer to take my case. I also believed that the case would end with a settlement or a jury would hear and render a verdict against all of the Defendants named in my lawsuit.

                               ELIOT SPITZER'S PERJURED APPELLEES' BRIEF

On October 1, 2001, Eliot Spitzer Appellant's Brief to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals was completed by Assistant Solicitor General Denise Hartman AND Assistant Solicitor General Nancy Spiegel. The brief like seven of the declarations filed in the District Court by Spitzer contained several instances of perjury. 

To my utter disappointment and amazement the brief contained the same 'LIE' and perjury that I was terminated in December 1998.

Today is June 16, 2015, and I just realized how egregious the December 7, 1998 date stated on page numbered 4 was in the Defendants-Appellees brief.  Assistant Solicitor Generals Denise Hartman AND Nancy Spiegel had the audacity to discuss Judge Elfvin's January 29, 1999, order. The order that stated I filed a motion to amend my complaint to include my November 2, 1998, termination. The order also gave me the right to amend my original lawsuit to include my November 2, 1998, retaliatory termination.
.

The same paragraph containing the December 7, 1998, lie, states "Plaintiff amended her complaint accordingly (Docket No 43). Defendants duly answered (Docket No 47)." My February 19, 1999, amended complaint (Docket No 43) at number 115 "On Monday November 2, 1998, plaintiff was terminated from her employment with Defendant NYSDOCS."

 In their grossly untimely April 30, 1998 duly answered complain (Docket No 47), the Defendants ADMITTED that I was terminated on November 2, 1998. The following pages of Spitzer's brief discuss my termination further and doesn't correct the fact that I was FIRED in November 1998 not December 1998.

More outrages and complete lack respect for me and Second Circuit Court of Appeals was her brief to that court. Hartman stated in her PERJURED Brief that NYSDOCS terminated me on December 7, 1998. She knew that NYSAG Spitzer opposed my appeal to that same court when I appealed District Court Judge Elfvin's order that denied me a temporary injunction to prevent my termination. She also knew that New York State Attorney General was successful because  Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied my appeal. Therefore, I was terminated on November 2, 1998, not December 7, 1998.

FINAL APPEAL OF MY DISABILITY RETIREMENT APPLICATION

On October 22, 2001, I attended a hearing and re-determination on my denied June 16, 1997, disability retirement. During my testimony at that hearing I made the judge and New York State and Retirement Systems Attorney Dana S. Riell aware of my employment discrimination case and the doctrine of judicial estoppel. 

I told the Judge and Riell that since NYS had won their summary judgment motion with the legal position that I was fired because I was medically unable to perform the duties of a Correctional Officer. Therefore, I was entitled to disability retirement.

The Retirement System’s Attorney Riell presented a length memorandum of law dated January 23, 2002. In the memorandum the New York State Retirement System legal position was that I was not disabled from performing the duties of a correctional officer. To support that position the judge was given the medical report of state hired doctor who said I could do the full duties of a correctional officer or any other job.

   

As you can see that Rielli's clearly stated legal position clearly contradicts Spitzer's legal position in both his summary judgment motion and Appellant's Brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Judge Marinelli should have issued a decision on my final appeal of my disability by March 29, 2002. In a July 2002, decision Marinelli ruled that "(1) applicant is not permanently incapacitated for the performance of duties as a correctional officer, and (2) the alleged May 20, 1993, and October 26, 1994, incidents were not the result of the act of an inmate (System's Exhibit 4).

On January 25, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its order. The Court of Appeals upheld the decision of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York. The Appeal Court agreed with Judge Elfvin’s order that dismissed my entire case including amy allegation of being unlawfully terminated in November 1998 in retaliation for filing my lawsuit.

I felt disappointed as I read the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision.  I didn’t understand the fact that neither the district court nor the appeals court mentioned the perjured non-retaliatory explanations presented in the Defendant’s sworn declarations filed in the district court.

           

Another reason that I was disappointed was the fact that for years I read cases in the Federal Reporter that were dissected extensively. I read the Federal Reporter while during course work and briefs in Criminal Justice classes at SUNY- Brockport. I also read the Reporter when ever I received any correspondences or legal documents from the Defendants that quoted cases and legal decisions.

I told family and friends that my case would be reversed and remanded back to the district court.  My firm belief was based on the fact that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals would reverse the case because of the precedent Supreme Court summary judgment rulings in Anderson v Libby Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986) and Reeves v Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc 530 U.S. 133 (2000) which Elfvin quoted in his twenty-five paged order.

I was shocked and surprised to discover in the court order that the Appeals Court had the authority to decide a case with a summary order. More shocking and disappointing was realizing all cases were not listed in the Federal Reporter and that Court ruling on case has the discretion to decide if a case will be published in the Federal Reporter.

I know now that God who I believe talks to people who have a relationship with Him kept that knowledge from me.  If I had known of the appeals court’s ability to deny the result of its ruling to be published in the Federal Reporter I wouldn’t have pursue my case any further than the district court.

I still believe that anyone especially a lawyer reading this blog and my entire book will agree that New York State Departments of Correctional Service and Civil Service discriminated and retaliated against me. I also believe that anyone who knows anything about the law will conclude that a jury should have decided my case.

A jury should have decided my retaliatory claims based on the Court's precedent summary judgement rulings in Anderson v Libby Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 255 (1986) Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the fact are "JURY" functions, not those of a "JUDGE," whether he is ruling on a motion for summary judgment or for a direct verdict. The evidence of the nonmovant is to be believed, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor. Adickes, 398 U.S. at 398 US.

                       FINAL APPEAL TO GOVERNOR ANDREW CUOMO

In 2008 as New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo refused my written requests to address and correct the unjust denial of my disability retirement application and appeal.

As Governor Cuomo should address, investigate, and use an Executive Order if necessary to award me entitled disability retirements benefits. Cuomo can use an executive order or support a bill that will give me entitled disability benefits from the date of my original application.

Other ways that  Governor Cuomo can make me whole from Spitzer's actions: State of New York can pay me back salary for the retaliatory failure of Albion CF staff to interview and/or reinstate me to the July 19, 1996, position of Supervisor of Inmate Grievance Program at Albion CF, and/or paying me the $3,000,000 that I demanded in my Title VII Civil Right Act of 1964 amended lawsuit.

The Supreme Court in Albermale identified two distinct congressional purposes of Title VII.  One of those purposes was “to make persons whole for injustices suffered on account of unlawful employment discrimination.”  Albermale Paper Co. v Moody, 422 U.S. 418 (1975).  The general language of 706(g) and the 1972 legislative history support of a general directive to District Courts to grant “make whole relief liberally and not refuse it arbitrarily.

                          FINAL APPEAL TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA

Mr. President you signed an Executive Order for Lilly Ledbetter and women will you sign another Executive Order for me and other African-Americans employment discrimination victims? Victims of unlawful discrimination shouldn't have their cases unjust dismissed at the district court based on one federal judge absolute authority to unjustly dismiss Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII cases based on summary judgment motions.

The Supreme Court in Albermale identified two distinct congressional purposes of Title VII.  One of those purposes was “to make persons whole for injustices suffered on account of unlawful employment discrimination.”  Albermale Paper Co. v Moody, 422 U.S. 418 (1975).  The general language of 706(g) and the 1972 legislative history support of a general directive to District Courts to grant “make whole relief liberally and not refuse it arbitrarily.

Based on a United States Supreme Court ruling " the salutary purpose of summary judgment—avoiding protracted, expensive and harassing trials --apply no less to discriminatory cases than to commercial or other areas of litigation" Meiri v Dacon, 759 F.2d 989, 998 (2d cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 829 (1985).

The clearly erroneous failure of the Court to review and reverse by Civil Rights Act 1964 discriminatory case discredits " Meiri v Dacon, 759 F.2d 989, 998 (2d cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 829 (1985). President Obama God created me and you to lead this nation to GREATNESS.

My case was not a private litigation. It was a process in which the public has substantial interest. As was said in United States v Hayes International Corporation, 5 Cir. 415 F.2d 1038, 1045, where an “employee is discriminatory denied a chance to fill a position for which he is qualified and has the seniority to obtain it, he suffers irreparable injury as does the labor force of the country as a whole.

The salutary purpose of summary judgment and the rights of all Americans to fair and equal justice can both be accomplished with a well written and defined amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Amending the Civil Rights Act again would prevent one judge from having the absolute power to grant summary judgment motions that dismiss Title VII (discrimination and retaliation) cases.

Vera Richardson

Download my $2.99 book  Screwed by Former Governor and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer . This blog entry and my book are perfect tools to have the national race conversation President Obama requested and need to SAVE ObamaCare from Supreme Court RACISM!