Marcy McNamara Lawsuit

Case 1:21-cv-01312-BKS-DJS Document 4 Filed 01/28/22 Page 1 of 21
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
MARGARET MCNAMARA,
Plaintiff,
-against- FIRST AMENDED

COMPLAINT AND
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
COUNTY OF SARATOGA, SARATOGA
COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, and Case No.: 1:21-CV-1312 (BKS/DJS)
THEODORE KUSNIERZ, individually and
in his official capacity as Chairman of the
Saratoga County Board of Supervisors, and
STEVE BULGER, individually and in his official
capacity as Saratoga County Administrator,
Defendants.
Plaintiff, MARGARET MCNAMARA, by and through her attorneys, Gleason, Dunn,
Walsh & 0'Shea, hereby alleges as her First Amended Complaint the following:
INTRODUCTION
1. In this action, plaintiff seeks redress for being subjected to a hostile work
environment based on her gender and not reappointed, to her position as the Human Resources
Director for defendant Saratoga County in retaliation for filing an internal complaint of
harassment, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§
2000e-2 et seq. ("Title VII"); the New York State Executive Law §§ 290 et seq. ("Human Rights
Law" or "HRL"); and 42 USC §§ 1981 and 1983.
2. In this action, plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages, back
pay, interest, costs, and attorneys' fees.

JUMSDICTION AND VENUE
3. The jurisdiction of this court is invoked pursuant to 28 USC §1331, 28 USC
§1343(a), and 42 USC §2000e-5(f)(l) and (3).
4. Plaintiff asserts that her claims under the Human Rights Law asserting individual
liability for discrimination on account of gender and retaliation for engaging in protected activity
under the Human Rights Law arise from the same set of operative facts and circumstances as the
claims under Title VII. Therefore, the jurisdiction of this Court, with respect to plaintiffs Human
Rights Law claims, is invoked pursuant to 28 USC §1367 (supplemental jurisdiction).
5. Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action.
6. The venue for this action is set in the Northern District of New York based on
the fact that the events relevant to this action took place in the County of Saratoga, State of New
York; defendants County of Saratoga and the Board of Supervisors are located within the County
of Saratoga; and the residences of the plaintiff and individual defendants are within the Northern
District of New York.
PARTIES
7. Plaintiff Margaret McNamara ("plaintiff or "Ms. McNamara") is a female over
the age of 21 who resides in the Town ofBallston Spa, County of Saratoga, State of New York.
8. Ms. McNamara was employed by the County of Saratoga from 2009 until her
discharge, which was effective on or about July 23,2021.

9. At the time of her termination, Ms. McNamara was employed as the Director of
Human Resources for the County of Saratoga.
2
10. At all times herein relevant, defendant County of Saratoga (the "County") was a
county duly organized and existing as a county pursuant to the laws of the State of New York, and
bound by Title VII, the HRL, and 42 USC § 1983.
11. At all times herein relevant, the County was the "employer" of Ms. McNamara
as that term is defined by Title VII and the Human Rights Law.
12. At all times herein relevant, defendant Saratoga County Board of Supervisors
(the "Board") was the Board comprised of twenty-three Supervisors representing the Towns within
the County.
13. At all times herein relevant, the Board made determinations regarding the
employment of Ms. McNamara and other County employees, including but not limited to,
decisions to hire, non-renew, and discharge employees.
14. Upon information and belief, defendant Theodore Kusnierz ("Defendant
Kusnierz") was elected the Saratoga County Supervisor for the Town ofMoreau effective January 1,
2018 and was elected as the Chairman of the Saratoga County Board of Supervisors on January 6,
2021.
15. Upon information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz is a resident of the Town of
Moreau, County of Saratoga, State of New York.
16. At all relevant times, Defendant Kusnierz unlawfully aided and abetted the other
Defendants' illegal acts and is therefore individually liable for his conduct and rightfully named
as a defendant herein pursuant to the Human Rights Law.
17. At all relevant times, Defendant Kusnierz was acting under color of state and
local law and deprived plaintiff of rights created by the applicable federal and state statutes.
3
18. Upon information and belief, defendant Steve Bulger ("Defendant Bulger") was
appointed Saratoga County Administrator on or around January 11, 2021.
19. Upon information and belief, Defendant Bulger is a resident of the County of
Saratoga, State of New York.
20. At all relevant times, Defendant Bulger unlawfully condoned, aided and abetted
the other Defendants' illegal acts and is therefore individually liable for his conduct and rightfully
named as a defendant herein pursuant to the Human Rights Law.
21. At all relevant times, Defendant Bulger was acting under color of state and/or
local law and deprived plaintiff of rights created by the applicable federal and state statutes.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
22. Plaintiff filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on or about September 8, 2021, alleging Defendant Kusnierz
subjected her to a hostile work environment because of her gender, and that her employment was
terminated in retaliation for having filed an internal complaint of harassment regarding the hostile
work environment created by Defendant Kusnierz.
23. One day later, the EEOC dismissed plaintiffs Charge of Discrimination and
issued a right to sue letter. A true and accurate copy of the EEOC "Dismissal and Notice of Rights"
(Right to Sue letter), dated September 9, 2021, is annexed hereto as Exhibit "A".
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
I. Plaintiffs Employment with the County;
24. Plaintiff began her employment with the County on May 29, 2009 as the Deputy
Director Human Resources.
4
25. Plaintiff was promoted to the Director of Human Resources position on May 29,
2015. Plaintiff was the County's first (and only) female Human Resources Director.
26. When she was appointed as the Director of Human Resources, plaintiff was
appointed for a six year term, which expired on May 22,2021.
27. As the Director of Human Resources, plaintiff oversaw all of the functions of
the Department of Human Resources, including, but not limited to: administering payroll and
benefits; managing employee and retiree healthcare plans and policies; handling employee
complaints and disciplinary matters; administering the Workers Compensation self-insurance
plan; negotiating Union matters and overseeing the creation and implementation of personnel
policy.
28. As the Director of Human Resources, plaintiffs performance was exemplary
and she received positive perfonnance reviews. Further, prior to 2020, plaintiff only received very
positive feedback regarding her performance.
29. In fact, plaintiff was asked to take on additional duties and responsibilities that
went above and beyond those that are traditionally managed by the Human Resources Department.
For example, plaintiff administered the 1 8B assigned counsel program, at the request of the Board.
30. For the majority of her time working for the County, plaintiff reported to the
County Administrator, Spencer Hellwig, and the Standing Coinmittee Chairperson.
31. In January 2021, the Board of Supervisors terminated County Administrator
Hellwig's appointment, effective January 1 0,2021;and appointed Defendant Bulger to be the new
County Administrator, effective January 11, 2021.
5
32. The County Administrator's role and responsibilities include supervising the
department heads, serving as the County's budget officer, providing staff support to the Board,
and administering the County government's execution of policies established by the Board.
II. Plaintiffs Interactions with Defendant Kusnierz:
33. Defendant Kusnierz has displayed a hostile attitude towards plaintiff throughout
the time that he has been a Town Supervisor, including by referring to her as "madame" in
derogatory tones.
34. This began when Defendant Kusnierz incorrectly blamed plaintiff for issues
regarding his New York State Retirement System ("NYSRS") registration, even though it was not
within plaintiff s job duties to address Defendant Kusnierz's retirement registration.
35. At that time, Defendant Kusnierz complained that plaintiff "doesn't know how
to do her job."
36. On March 11, 2020, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Board
passed a resolution allowing the County to pay essential workers time and a half in order to provide
them with additional compensation.
37. This additional pay was adopted by the Board pursuant to Resolution 84-2020
which included a provision "to provide for a flexible and expeditious process for determining
appropriate County staffing levels and rates of compensation in response to the County's efforts
to contain and mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic and any current directives of the Governor
affecting local governments."
38. The Board Resolution further provided that the "Chair of the Board, the Chair
of the Law and Finance Committee, the Chair of the Human Resources and Insurance Committee,
6
the County Administrator and the Director of Human Resources shall have the authority to jointly
determine appropriate County employee staffing levels and rates of compensation . ..".
39. As represented in the Board minutes for this meeting, during the discussion of
Resolution 84-2020, one of the Supervisors expressed concerns about paying employees time and
a half and suggested that this be limited to a thirty-day period.
40. Plaintiff responded that the time and a half compensation would be reviewed one
week at a time. Defendant Kusnierz responded that "he whole-heartedly support[ed] this."
41. Several management level employees received the additional time and a half
compensation in error.
42. Defendant Kusnierz publicly singled out plaintiff in an interview with the
Albany Times Union newspaper. The Times Union article reports, in part:
Kusnierz said he supports paying extra wages to those who are putting
themselves and their families at risk, like public nurses. But he said it is
"absolutely outrageous" to be paying, for example, the Director of
Human Resources Marcy McNamara time-and-a-half. McNamara is on
the county's compensation committee making the decision about the
pay, along with Alien, Greenfield Supervisor Dan Pemrick, Saratoga
Supervisor Tom Wood and Hellwig.
43. In an effort to diffuse the hostility that was directed toward her from Defendant
Kusnierz, on March 26, 2020, plaintiff sent an email to the Board requesting that Defendant
Kusnierz address all requests to Human Resources through the County Administrator, County
Chair, or County Attorney. Plaintiff made this request because Defendant Kusnierz had "been
extremely offensive and retaliatory" during the conversations that they had regarding the COVID-
19 pandemic.
7
44. In response, Defendant Kusnierz continued his hostile behavior by threatening
to address alleged performance concerns prior to COVID-19, although plaintiff s perfonnance was
exemplary and never subject to a negative review.
45. The following day, on March 27, 2020, plaintiff attended a County meeting
where Defendant Kusnierz called for plaintiffs resignation.
46. Also on March 27, 2020, Defendant Kusnierz informed County Administrator
Hellwig, and then Chair of the Board, Preston Alien, that plaintiff "better apologize or this would
not go away."
47. On information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz informed other Board
Supervisors that he was "out to get" plaintiff and that he wanted her "gone."
48. On information and belief, other than allowing the rash of hostility from
Defendant Kusnierz to continue, neither the County nor the Board responded to plaintiffs
concerns in her March 26, 2020 email.
49. The County hired the law firm of E. Stewart Jones Hacker Murphy ("Jones
Hacker") to conduct an independent investigation into the COVID-19 pandemic additional pay
concerns. On information and belief, the Jones Hacker report concluded that plaintiff had done
nothing unlawful and there was no reason to terminate her employment.
III. Plaintiffs Internal Complaint of Harassment:
50. On April 28, 2020, plaintiff filed a Complaint of Alleged Discrimination with
the County in which she provided that Defendant Kusnierz had allegedly harassed her. Plaintiffs
Complaint included an attachment which listed specific incidents between March 25, 2020 and
April 21, 2020 where Defendant Kusnierz took actions to intimidate and humiliate her, create a
8
hostile work environment, and threaten her job. A true and accurate copy of Ms. McNamara's
Complaint is annexed hereto as Exhibit "B".
51. In her Complaint, plaintiff sought the following as appropriate redress:
To have Supervisor Kusnierz review and sign again the Saratoga

County's unlawful workplace harassment policy. To direct HR related
questions to the County administrator, County Chair, or the County
Attorney as requested on 3/26/2020.
(See Ex. B).
52. The County hired an attorney from the law firm of Bond Schoeneck & King to
conduct an investigation into plaintiffs Complaint.
53. The attorney investigator interviewed plaintiff on May 13, 2020 and July 21,
2020, and Defendant Kusnierz on June 3, 2020.
54. On or around August 25, 2020, plaintiff contacted the attorney investigator and
provided information regarding additional concerns of harassment and retaliation that had arisen
after Defendant Kusnierz became aware of plaintiff s complaint.
55. Rather than increase the scope of his investigation to properly review plaintiffs
additional concerns, the attorney investigator concluded his investigation on August 28, 2020.
Although the attorney investigator, who was paid by the County, found that Defendant Kusnierz
did not discriminate or harass plaintiff on the basis of her gender, he found that Defendant
Kusnierz's conduct was unprofessional and recommended that Defendant Kusnierz be reminded
of the prohibitions of the County's Harassment Policy.
56. Shortly afiter plaintiff received a copy of the report in response to her complaint
of harassment, she was called into a meeting with Defendant Bulger and the County Attorney
where she was warned that she was prohibited from telling anyone about her complaint.
9
IV. Defendants' Continued Harassment of Plaintiff:
57. During and after the investigation into plaintiffs internal complaint of
harassment concluded, Defendants continued to harass plaintiff and allowed Defendant Kusnierz
to harass and retaliate against plaintiff.
58. For example, at the August 2020 Board meeting, Defendant Kusnierz demanded
that plaintiff resign from her employment as the Director of Human Resources.
59. On information and belief, in October 2020, the Board formed a committee to
review the Jones Hacker report regarding the COVID-19 additional pay issue and to determine
whether any eniployees should be subjected to discipline. On information and belief. Defendant
Kusnierz was initially appointed to this committee, but withdrew because plaintiff had filed the
internal complaint of harassment against him. However, this alleged "withdrawal" was a ruse
since Defendant Kusnierz attended every committee meeting and was involved in the discussions
regarding potential discipline.
60. Throughout 2020 and into 2021, Defendant Kusnierz also engaged in harassing
and humiliating behaviors and sought to diminish plaintiffs role and responsibilities as the
Director of Human Resources. This included, but is not limited to, the following:
a. Defendant Kusnierz ceased the longstanding practice of including plaintiff
in biweekly meetings with the department heads where important matters
for the County and departmental employees were discussed. Plaintiff had
always been invited to such meetings in the past.
b. On information and belief, as Chair of the Board, Defendant Kusnierz made
the determination to not appoint plaintiff as the HIPAA Officer or
10
Affirmative Action Officer even though she has held these positions
historically, as the Hiunan Resources Director.
c. On information and belief, as Chair of the Board, Defendant Kusnierz made
the determination to not appoint plaintiff to serve on the Labor Management
Committee, even though she has historically served on this Committee, as
the Human Resources Director.
d. On information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz undermined plaintiffs
position by failing to communicate with her or keep her apprised of human
resources issues.
e. On information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz singled plaintiff out during
Board meetings to ask questions regarding insignificant issues in an attempt
to embarrass and harass plaintiff. Such questions were not asked of plaintiff
in Board meetings before she filed her internal complaint of discrimination.
f. Defendant Kusnierz requested a meeting with plaintiff and when plaintiff
responded with a time to meet. Defendant Kusnierz failed to respond or
appear for the meeting.
g. On information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz undermined plaintiffs
union negotiations, effectively reducing her authority.
h. On information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz informed other Board
Supervisors that he wanted plaintiff punished for filing a complaint of
harassment against him.
61. Throughout this time, plaintiff suffered from such extreme emotional trauma and
distress, that she sought the assistance of a psychiatrist.
11
62. Defendants' harassment and retaliation of plaintiff became even more apparent
in April of 2021 when plaintiff requested an agenda item regarding her reappointment for the
Board meeting at the Human Resources & Insurance Committee meeting on April 27, 2021.
63. On the Agenda Item Request Form, plaintiff noted that she was seeking a
reappointment for another six year term, from May 22, 2021 through May 22, 2027.
64. Instead of approving plaintiffs agenda item allowing for her reappointment to
go to the full Board, the Committee decided to appoint a search committee to solicit applicants for
plaintiffs position as the Human Resources Director. On information and belief, this is the first
time the Board solicited outside applicants for the position when there was a qualified internal
candidate available to serve in the position.
65. On information and belief, the process that was utilized for the search, including
the empanelment of the search committee, was not in compliance with the applicable policy, past
practice, or current practice.
66. On information and belief, four candidates were interviewed for the Human
Resources Director position - three internal female candidates and one external male candidate.
67. On information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz controlled the search committee
process that resulted in the selection of the external male candidate of equal or lesser qualifications
as plaintiff to serve as the Human Resources Director.
68. On June 11, 2021, after learning that the male candidate for the Human
Resources Director position would be brought before the full Board for approval, plaintiff sent a
letter to all of the Board members.
12
69. In her letter, plaintiff stated that she intended to file both an external complaint
and an internal complaint with the County Attorney since she was being retaliated against based
on her filing the complaint against Defendant Kusnierz.
70. In response, the County Attorney sent an email to plaintiff in which he parsed
out the words in her letter to determine that plaintiff was not filing an internal complaint at this
juncture. The County Attorney further admonished plaintiff for referencing her prior complaint of
harassment and for failing to provide a complaint form if she intended for her letter to be a
complaint.
71. On information and belief, the County Attorney was obligated to report any
allegations of discrimination, harassment or retaliation for investigation instead of admonishing a
potential complainant.
V. Failure to Reappoint Plaintiff:
72. The County held a Board of Supervisors meeting on June 15, 2021.
73. At that meeting, Defendant Kusnierz caused Resolution #190 to be added to the
agenda, since it was not included with the twenty (20) other resolutions which were made a part
of the public meeting agenda posted on the County's website.
74. After the Board voted to add Resolution #190 to the agenda, it was provided to
all of the Supervisors.
75. According to the meeting transcript. Resolution # 190 provided the following:
Resolution 190 of 2021 introduced by Supervisors Barrett and Lant.

Appointing Scot E. Chamberlin as Director of Personnel / Human
Resources Director. Whereas as a result of the expiration of the term of
appointment of Margaret C. McNamara on May 22 2021. Pursuant to
Public Officers Saw, section 5 the position of Director of Personnel /
Human Resources Director is ciurently vacant for the purposes of
appointing a successor. And whereas pursuant to County Policy, chapter
4 section U titled Appointment of Department Heads, a search
13
committee was formed. And whereas the search committee has selected
Scot E. Chamberlain, and forwarded his name to the Law and Finance
Committee for informational purposes, and to the full Board for final
approval. Now, therefore be it resolved, that effective August 2 2021
Scot E. Chamberlain of the Town ofHalfmoon, Saratoga County, New
York, is hereby appointed Director of Personnel / Human Resources
Director at the County of Saratoga for a six year term to expire on May
22 2027, at the base level of salary, grade number 23. On the Saratoga
County Management Compensation Schedule. Budget impact
statement, no budget impact.
76. Following the introduction of Resolution #190, the Board members had a
discussion which confirmed that Resolution #190 was provided to the Board without the review
and approval of any Board committees.
77. As the discussion ensued, some Board members made motions to strike Mr.
Chamberlain's name from Resolution #190 and insert plaintiffs name. However, the amendments
were not accepted.
78. Although only nine (9) Board Supervisors voted in favor of the Resolution, and
twelve (12) Board Supervisors voted against the Resolution, Resolution #190 to appoint Mr.
Chamberlain as the Human Resources Director was adopted based upon the size of the Towns
which were in favor of the Resolution.
79. After Mr. Chamberlain was approved as the Human Resources Director,
effective August 2, 2021, the County asked plaintiff to continue in her role through the end of July
so she could sign required documentation for municipalities and school districts.
80. Plaintiff agreed to stay in her role through the end of July provided the Coimty
would pay her for her unused, but accrued sick leave, and the County agreed.
81. On information and belief, throughout this time, various Board members made
representations to plaintiff regarding the prospect of her continued employment in another role for
14
the County as an inducement to have her continue as the Human Resources Director throughout
July 2021.
82. One such position that was considered for plaintiff was an existing Education
and Community Relations Coordinator position for the Mental Health Center, reporting to
Commissioner Michael Prezioso, Ph.D. ("Dr. Prezioso").
83. On information and belief, after Dr. Prezioso and plaintiff agreed on the
parameters of the position, Defendant Bulger informed Dr. Prezioso that plaintiff was "trouble"
and that she should not be offered the position.
84. On information and belief, Defendant Bulger's conversation with Dr. Prezioso
was at the behest of Defendant Kusnierz.
85. Plaintiffs last day of work for the County was on July 23, 2021. Instead of
paying plaintiff for her accrued sick leave as promised, the County presented plaintiff with a
release of claims that she was required to sign in order to receive the payment. Plaintiff refused to
sign the release and was never paid out for her sick leave.
86. Plaintiff also was not offered any other positions working for the County, even
though she was assured that such positions would be made available to her and she was only one
and a half years away from a twenty-year milestone in the New York State Retirement System
plan in which she was enrolled.
87. On September 21, 2021, Defendant Kusnierz appointed Mr. Chamberlain to

serve as both the Affirmative Action Officer and HIPAA Administrator, for terms expiring on
December 31, 2021 - two roles that plaintiff had held prior to filing her internal complaint against
Defendant Kusnierz, but was not reappointed to as part of Defendant Kusnierz's campaign of
harassment and retaliation.
15
8 8. Also on September 21,202 1, Defendant Kusnierz submitted a Board Resolution
to appoint Mr. Chamberlin as the Workers' Compensation Administrator, for a term expiring on
December 31, 2022. This Resolution was adopted by the Board at the meeting.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Hostile Work Environment Motivated by Gender Bias under Title VII)
89. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs
"1" through "88" above, as if set forth in full herein.
90. Defendants discriminated against plaintiff by subjecting her to a hostile work
environment on the basis of her gender in violation of Title VII.
91. The County and Board effectively condoned this hostile work environment by
failing to protect plaintiff from Defendant Kusnierz's harassment.
92. As a direct and proximate result of said acts, plaintiff has suffered and continues to
suffer pain and suffering, mental anguish, distress, humiliation, great expense, embarrassment and
damage to her reputation.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(Hostile Work Environment Motivated by Retaliation under Title VII)
94. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity as defined under Title VII by repeatedly
complaining to the Board Supervisors and filing an internal complaint of discrimination regarding
the hostile work environment she was subjected to because of her gender.
95. Defendants subjected plaintiff to a hostile work environment in retaliation for
her protected activity by permitting Defendant Kusnierz to harass, belittle, and threaten plaintiff
with the termination of her employment in violation of Title VII.
16
96. Defendants subjected plaintiff to a hostile work environment in retaliation for
her protected activity by allowing and requiring Defendant Bulger to harass, belittle and threaten
plaintiff and prohibit other offices within the County to hire plaintiff to an alternative position.
97. The County and Board effectively condoned the behaviors of Defendants
Kusnierz and Bulger.
98. As a direct and proximate result of said acts, plaintiff has suffered and continues to
suffer pain and suffering, mental anguish, distress, humiliation, great expense, embarrassment and
damage to her reputation.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Retaliation under Title VII)
"1" through "98" above, as if set forth in fall herein.
100. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity as defined under Title VII by repeatedly
complaining to the Board Supervisors and County Attorney, and filing an internal complaint of
discrimination regarding the hostile work environment she was subjected to because of her gender.
101. Defendants retaliated against plaintiff on account of her protected activity by
refusing to submit a resolution renewing her appointment as the Human Resources Director to the
Board for approval, in violation of Title VII.
102. Defendants retaliated against plaintiff by appointing a male candidate instead of
plaintiff to the Human Resources Director position for the County, in violation of Title VII.
103. Defendants retaliated against plaintiff by failing to appoint her to another
position within the County, in violation of Title VII.
104. Defendants retaliated against plaintiff by failing to pay her out for her accmed
sick leave as promised, in violation of Title VII.
17
105. As a direct and proximate result of said act, plaintiff has suffered loss of
employment and income, and has suffered and continues to suffer loss of other employment benefits,
distress, humiliation, great expense, embarrassment and damage to her reputation.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(New York State Human Rights Law)
107. By their conduct described herein, defendants discriminated against plaintiff in
the terms and conditions of her employment and deprived plaintiff of her rights, on the basis of
her gender, in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law, New York Executive Law §§
290.et seq.
108. By their conduct described herein, defendants retaliated against plaintiff for
engaging in protected activity, in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law, New York
Executive Law §§ 290, et seq.
109. By their conduct described herein. Defendant Kusnierz harassed plaintiff, in
violation of the New York State Human Rights Law, New York Executive Law §§ 290, et seq.
110. By failing to prevent Defendants Kusnierz and Bulger from harassing plaintiff,
the County and Board condoned the discriminatory and harassing conduct of Defendants Kusnierz
and Bulger.
111. Defendant Kusnierz, as Chairman of the Board, and Defendant Bulger, as the
County Administrator, have decision-making authority for the County and the Board.
112. By failing to prevent Defendant Kusnierz from discriminating against, harassing,
and retaliating against plaintiff, Defendant Bulger aided and abetted Defendant Kusnierz.
18
113. By actively participating in discriminatory, harassing, and retaliatory conduct,
Defendant Bulger aided and abetted Defendant Kusnierz, the County and the Board in engaging
in unlawful discriminatory practices.
114. By failing to prevent Defendant Bulger from discriminating against, harassing,
and retaliating against plaintiff, Defendant Kusnierz aided and abetted Defendant Bulger.
115. By actively participating in discriminatory, harassing, and retaliatory conduct,
Defendant Kusnierz aided and abetted Defendant Bulger, the County and the Board in engaging
in unlawful discriminatory practices.
116. Plaintiff was injured as a direct and proximate result of defendants'
discriminatory, harassing, and retaliatory conduct.
117. By reason of the foregoing, plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Violation of equal protection under 42 USC §1983)
119. By engaging in disparate treatment against plaintiff, while acting under color of
state law. Defendant Kusnierz violated plaintiffs entitlement to equal protection under the law.
120. Defendant Kusnierz willfully violated plaintiff s entitlement to equal protection
solely by virtue of his authority as a County official.
121. For all relevant periods herein, plaintiffs entitlement to equal protection under
the law was clearly established.
122. Defendant Kusnierz knew, or should have known, that his actions violated a
clearly established law.
123. As a result, plaintiff suffered emotional trauma and distress.
19
124. Defendant Kusnierz is therefore liable to plaintiff, in his individual capacity, for
damages under §1983.
125. Defendant Kusnierz is also liable to plaintiff, in his official capacity, for
prospective injunctive relief under 42 USC §1983.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully seeks an Order:
A. Adjudging and declaring that the conduct of defendants violated plaintiffs rights
under Title VII; the New York Human Rights Law, New York Executive Law §§
290, et sea.; and 42 USC §1983;
B. Adjudging and declaring that the conduct of defendants in subjecting plaintiff to a
hostile work environment constitutes retaliation for her protected activity that
violates Title VII;
C. Adjudging and declaring that the defendants' termination of plaintiffs
employment constitutes retaliation for her protected activity that violates Title VII;
D. Adjudging and declaring that Defendant Kusnierz is individually liable for Ms
discriminatory, harassing, and retaliatory conduct against plaintiff;
E. Adjudging and declaring that Defendant Bulger is individually liable for his
discriminatory, harassing, and retaliatory conduct against plaintiff;
F. Awarding plaintiff back pay, benefits and other emoluments of employment;
G. Awarding plaintiff compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by the
jury;
H. Awarding plaintiff punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the jury;
I. Awarding plaintiff the costs and disbursements of this action, including an award
of attorneys' fees; and
20
J. Awarding such other, further and different relief as this Court deems just.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff respectfully demands trial by jury on each and every issue of the Complaint.
DATED: Albany, New York GLEASON, DUNN, WALSH & O'SHEA

January 28, 2022
By:
^^^^^^
MARK T. WALSH, ESQ.
Bar Roll No. 102781
NANCY S. WILLIAMSON, ESQ.
Bar Roll No. 702205
Attorneys for Plaintiff
40 Beaver Street
Albany, New York 12207
(518)432-7511
21

Marcy McNamara Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Marcy McNamara Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:21-cv-01312-BKS-DJS Document 4 Filed 01/28/22 Page 1 of 21

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-against- FIRST AMENDED

Plaintiff, MARGARET MCNAMARA, by and through her attorneys, Gleason, Dunn,

Law" or "HRL"); and 42 USC §§ 1981 and 1983.

2. In this action, plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages, back

pay, interest, costs, and attorneys' fees.

JUMSDICTION AND VENUE

3. The jurisdiction of this court is invoked pursuant to 28 USC §1331, 28 USC

§1343(a), and 42 USC §2000e-5(f)(l) and (3).

Rights Law claims, is invoked pursuant to 28 USC §1367 (supplemental jurisdiction).

5. Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action.

District of New York.

7. Plaintiff Margaret McNamara ("plaintiff or "Ms. McNamara") is a female over

discharge, which was effective on or about July 23,2021.

Human Resources for the County of Saratoga.

bound by Title VII, the HRL, and 42 USC § 1983.

decisions to hire, non-renew, and discharge employees.

14. Upon information and belief, defendant Theodore Kusnierz ("Defendant

Moreau, County of Saratoga, State of New York.

as a defendant herein pursuant to the Human Rights Law.

appointed Saratoga County Administrator on or around January 11, 2021.

Saratoga, State of New York.

named as a defendant herein pursuant to the Human Rights Law.

22. Plaintiff filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on or about September 8, 2021, alleging Defendant Kusnierz

work environment created by Defendant Kusnierz.

I. Plaintiffs Employment with the County;

Director Human Resources.

appointed for a six year term, which expired on May 22,2021.

complaints and disciplinary matters; administering the Workers Compensation self-insurance

28. As the Director of Human Resources, plaintiffs performance was exemplary

positive feedback regarding her performance.

County Administrator, Spencer Hellwig, and the Standing Coinmittee Chairperson.

31. In January 2021, the Board of Supervisors terminated County Administrator

County Administrator, effective January 11, 2021.

them with additional compensation.

affecting local governments."

44. In response, Defendant Kusnierz continued his hostile behavior by threatening

exemplary and never subject to a negative review.

where Defendant Kusnierz called for plaintiffs resignation.

47. On information and belief, Defendant Kusnierz informed other Board

concerns in her March 26, 2020 email.

nothing unlawful and there was no reason to terminate her employment.

III. Plaintiffs Internal Complaint of Harassment:

Complaint is annexed hereto as Exhibit "B".

51. In her Complaint, plaintiff sought the following as appropriate redress:

To have Supervisor Kusnierz review and sign again the Saratoga

(See Ex. B).

conduct an investigation into plaintiffs Complaint.

2020, and Defendant Kusnierz on June 3, 2020.

after Defendant Kusnierz became aware of plaintiff s complaint.

of the prohibitions of the County's Harassment Policy.

IV. Defendants' Continued Harassment of Plaintiff:

to harass and retaliate against plaintiff.

regarding potential discipline.

a. Defendant Kusnierz ceased the longstanding practice of including plaintiff

in biweekly meetings with the department heads where important matters

always been invited to such meetings in the past.

b. On information and belief, as Chair of the Board, Defendant Kusnierz made

the determination to not appoint plaintiff as the HIPAA Officer or

historically, as the Hiunan Resources Director.