Attachment 6 EDNY Hodge v Cuomo 21-cv-01421 Complaint

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 112 Page of 112 154 of PageID 154 #: 368 converted and embezzled by the Owner Operator Defendants, their Owner Operator Defendants, the Party-in-Interest Defendants, all the while and under color of law allowed by the failure of the State Officer Defendants to monitor, audit and manage the tens of millions of dollars paid by Medicaid/Medicare for the very costs of benefits incorporated into the per occupied bed rate paid by the State DOH. 634. The Union Defendant is part of the problem having failed in its duty to protect the interests of its members; the Union Defendant is part of the mess. The Union Defendant is part of the default in protecting the interests of the employee Class Plaintiff. 635. The Union Defendant induced the wrong and maintained it. 636. Everyone involved in the Union Defendant organization collaborated to induce sealing off access to the skill and knowledge to keep out members of the employee Class Plaintiff from gaining the skill and knowledge so as to limit access to better paying jobs and careers, keeping everyone else out; sealing it to a select group of Union members, keeping out others, others being the broader employee Class Plaintiff and others who would aspire to these occupations, restricting access to the occupations in concert with the Owner Operator Defendants, restricting access to members of Union Defendant. The goal of the Union Defendant to keep other non-union members from the skill and knowledge of the occupations of CNA, LPN, RN, a part of the scheme to restrict access to skills by the members of the Class Plaintiff. Precedent and Jurisdiction to Enforce the Alternative Employment Practice 637. This action is grounded on the record in US SDNY Case 73-cv-04279, the case file archived as potentially of national significance in St. Louis, Missouri, the case file returned from St. Louis to the National Archives in New York City, returned upon the request on behalf of Mr. Percy, and certified by the National Archives to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, which record was then filed by ECF as the Docket on Appeal to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals in appeal 17-2273. Intervention Pg. 92 Par 184. 638. That action is grounded upon the final and enforceable Memorandum/Order (“Memorandum/Order”) of Judge Lasker reported at 384 F Supp 800 of November 8, 1974. Case 73-cv-04279 was settled on May 4, 1977 by agreement accepting Defendant New York State’s offer of Executive Order 45. The problem is that Executive Order 45 failed and the Sub-Class was never notified. Intervention Pg. 92 Par 185. 639. Liability is for violation of 42 U.S.C. §§2000e-2, rights secured to the Percy Class as the Complaining Party, liability of the Employer under the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. §§§§ 2000e-2, 1981, 1983, 1985. Intervention Pg. 93 Par 186 112
Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 113 Page of 113 154 of PageID 154 #: 369 640. The Alternative Employment Practice under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and specifically 42 USCA §2000e-2 and §2000d as amended in 1991 (the “Civil Rights Act”), is delivered with workers’ compensation coverage. All employment is required to be covered by workers' compensation. Intervention Pg. 93 Par 187. Damages for an illegal employment practice 641. Damage and injury has been caused to members of a class of persons injured on the job, injured primarily because of the negligent or intentional behavior of the Employers to conduct on-the-job training with related classroom instruction is a function of an alternative employment practice demonstrated and delivered to the Defendants as safety and loss management under the National Apprenticeship Act, demonstrated to have provided to the risk control manager of Defendants, for over 10 years, the Owner Operator Defendants failing to adopt this demonstrated employment practice. 642. The State of New York took overt steps to dismantle the Percy employment practice as described herein. 643. The Executive Branch of New York government, through its appointed Commissioner of Insurance, failed to acknowledge and give credit to the Percy Employment Practice demonstrated as provided through Workers' Compensation Insurance to the Owner Operator Defendants, causing egregious injury to the Class as a whole, and in particular, permitting an illegal employment practice with particular disparate impact upon the Percy subclass under color of law. the State of New York by the State Officer Defendants permitting this illegal employment practice under 42 U.S.C. 2000 e-2. NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER 42 U.S.C. §1983 FOR DAMAGES UNDER 42 U.S.C. §1981 AND 1985 AGAINST STATE OFFICER DEFENDANTS CONSPIRING WITH PARTY-IN-INTEREST DEFENDANTS TO VIOLATE 14TH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTION CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF THE CLASS 644. The Plaintiffs repeat and reiterate the allegations set forth above as though fully set forth herein. 645. The Defendant Government Agencies, individually and collectively, jointly and severally conspired and acted to frustrate the efforts of Percy limiting the effectiveness of the Percy Program in its support of the efforts to provide training to enable the Percy Class to compete for jobs which can lead to rewarding careers providing reliable and steady income and benefits for those workers and their families. 646. As a Government Agency of the State of New York, the DFS is delegated extensive powers from the State government office of the Governor. 647. The DFS Government Agency suspended the ability of the Percy Program to be in business by wrongfully exercising Insurance Law §1104(c) on June 30, 2004. The State's 113
Page 1 and 2:
Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No.
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62: Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No.
Page 111: Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No.
show all

Attachment 6 EDNY Hodge v Cuomo 21-cv-01421 Complaint

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?