Plaintiffs, Civil Action. Monmouth and State of New Jersey, allege as follows: THE PARTIES

Transcription

1 SMITH MULLIN, P.C. 240 Claremont Avenue Montclair, New Jersey (973) Attorneys for Plaintiffs Christine Savage and Elena Gonzalez ELENA GONZALEZ and CHRISTINE SAVAGE, 111\ DEClp 2013 J MONMOUTH VICINAGE CIVIL DIVISION 078 SUPERIOR COURT OF NJ TialiMOTH VIcINAGE ECEIVE.D CIVIS 5113 DEC 10 A 11: 15 x SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY : LAW DIVISION - MONMOUTH COUNTY : DOCKET NO.: z_ q F97 v. Plaintiffs, Civil Action NEPTUNE TOWNSHIP; NEPTUNE POLICE DEPARTMENT; ROBERT H. ADAMS, in an individual and official capacity; JAMES M. HUNT, in an individual and official capacity; and MICHAEL EMMONS, in an individual and official capacity, COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Defendants. Elena Gonzalez, residing at 20 Cedar Terrace, Neptune Township, County of Monmouth and State of New Jersey, and Christine Savage, residing at 1614 Walnut Street, Wall, County of Monmouth and State of New Jersey, allege as follows: THE PARTIES 1. During all times relevant to this cause of action, plaintiff Elena Gonzalez ("Gonzalez") was an employee of Neptune Township ("Township" or "Neptune") as that term is defined by the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, /V.1S.A. 10:5-1 et seq. (The "LAD"). 2. During all times relevant to this cause of action, plaintiff Christine Savage ("Savage") was an employee of Neptune Township ("Township" or "Neptune") as that term is defined by the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq. (The "LAD").

2 3. Defendant Neptune Township is a governmental unit which controls the operations and employees of the Neptune Police Department (The "Department"). The Defendant Township is an employer, as defined in 1V.J.S.A. 10: Defendant Neptune Police Department is an agency of a governmental unit. 5. During all times relevant to this Complaint, prior to his retirement, Robert Adams was a Chief, Deputy Chief, Captain and Lieutenant of the Neptune Township Police Department, an upper level manager of Defendant Neptune who aided and abetted in the harassment, discrimination and retaliation as more fully alleged herein. 6. During all times relevant to this Complaint, James Hunt was a Deputy Chief, Captain, and Lieutenant of the Neptune Police Department and an upper level manager of Defendant Neptune, who aided and abetted in the harassment, discrimination and retaliation as more fully alleged herein. 7. During all times relevant to this Complaint, Michael Emmons was a Captain, Lieutenant, and Sergeant in the Neptune Police Department and an upper level manager of Defendant Neptune, who aided and abetted in the harassment, discrimination and retaliation as more fully alleged herein. COUNT ONE (Sex Discrimination Against Elena Gonzalez) 8. In February 2006, Plaintiff Gonzalez began her career as a dispatcher with the Neptune Police Department. In July, of 2006, Plaintiff Gonzalez was hired as a full-time police officer. 2

3 9. Plaintiff Gonzalez has an Associate's Degree in Science (with honors), a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Criminal Justice, cum laude, and a Master's Degree in Public Administration (with honors). She will complete work for an MBA in August of Plaintiff Gonzalez has received numerous awards for her police service from outside agencies, while being overlooked for awards by Defendants. For example, she received recognition and a scholarship from the Middlesex County Prosecutor's Office, an award from the Monmouth County Task Force on Drunk Driving, and a letter of recognition from the FBI-Newark Special Agent in Charge for her role as the team leader on a project. 11. Throughout her career with Defendant Neptune, Plaintiff Gonzalez witnessed and has been subjected to sexual harassment and sex discrimination. 12. For example and without limitation, Plaintiff Gonzalez was assigned to Neptune high school as a school resource officer beginning in September of In that capacity she repeatedly requested to be qualified as a tactical officer and to receive active shooter training. She was repeatedly denied that training. 13. During the school year, Plaintiff Gonzalez again asked for active shooter training, which Defendant Hunt denied advising her that if she encountered an active shooter, she would "have to sacrifice [herself]." Officer Gregory Washington, the Neptune middle school resource officer, was given active shooter training and training as a tactical officer. He was assigned a tactical vehicle to take to the middle school. 14. In or about May 2013, three years later, Plaintiff Gonzalez, without the requested training, was qualified as a tactical officer but never given the active shooter training she requested. 3

4 To date, despite her requests, she is still not permitted to take the, tactical vehicle to her school assignment, unlike her male counterpart. 15. On two separate occasions, in or about 2007 and 2011, Plaintiff Gonzalez requested assignment to the "quality of life" unit. She was denied the assignment. Sergeant Mangold told her she was denied this assignment because she is a "single mother." 16. On or about December 3, 2012, Defendant Neptune made promotions to the position of sergeant. Despite her superior qualifications and recognized service with the department, Plaintiff Gonzalez was not promoted. Instead, Defendant promoted seven (7) males. 17. During her career Plaintiff Gonzalez interviewed for promotion to sergeant three times. Each time the interview board asked different questions of the candidates to favor the male candidates. 18. Plaintiff Gonzalez has been subjected to unfair scrutiny and discipline. For example and without limitation, in or about February of 2013, Defendant Hunt issued Plaintiff Gonzalez a written reprimand for a missed supplemental duty detail in August of 2012, six (6) months after the event. Plaintiff Gonzalez had previously received an oral reprimand for the same incident. The written reprimand constituted a clear violation of the Attorney General's rule that officers be charged for misconduct within 45 days. Additionally, the February discipline was in addition to the previous discipline that was imposed in August of Defendants Hunt and Adams issued the illegal discipline in order to prevent Plaintiff Gonzalez from being promoted. 20. In or about March of 2013, the opportunity for promotion to the position of sergeant was posted. Again, despite her qualifications, Plaintiff Gonzalez was passed over for promotion. 4

5 21. On or about April 22, 2013, Defendants promoted two less-qualified males. 22. In May of 2013, Officer Gonzalez requested the criteria and application process for assignment to the prestigious FBI and the Monmouth County Task Forces. Her requests were denied. Defendant Adams stated, falsely, that the agencies requested a "specific type of officer". When Officer Gonzalez asked what "type of officer" they requested, Adams refused to answer. Officer Gonzalez subsequently learned the FBI never made such a request. 23. Plaintiffs have witnessed and been subjected to sexual harassment and a hostile work environment. 24. For example and without limitation Plaintiffs have witnessed and been subject to: a. Defendant Emmons has sent pornographic materials to male officers and goaded them to respond to the sexist materials in the presence of women in the department; b. Defendant Emmons gesturing as if he was masturbating and shooting at officers with his penis saying "pow, pow, pow"; c. Then Sergeant Emmons stated in front of Plaintiff Gonzalez that he had "fisted" another officer's wife the night before; d. In or about late December of 2011, a magnet that said "I (heart) PENIS" was intentionally placed on Plaintiff Gonzalez's patrol car that was designated for her to take to Neptune high school for use in her capacity as a school resource officer; e. In or about June of 2013, Emmons asked a female interviewing for a position of police officer if she was going to have any children; and 5

6 f. In or about July of 2012, a message was left on Officer Gonzalez's patrol car in-car mobile data terminal ("MDT"). The message said "I am Bryan Taylor & I like penis!!!! Nothing makes me happier than having a large penis in my mouth with semen ejaculated down my esophagus!!!" 25. When Plaintiff Gonzalez complained to Defendants Adams, Emmons, Captain Leather, and Lt. McGhee about the harassment and hostile work environment created by these and other demeaning and sexist behaviors she was told to "get used to it" and "that is the culture here." 26. In each of the aforementioned incidents no officer was disciplined. 27. Despite the aforementioned behavior, Defendant Emmons has been repeatedly promoted. 28. Emmons's sexist and sexually explicit behaviors are well known throughout the department. For example, when Emmons was promoted to Captain, retired Lt. Burst sent him a text message saying "now you're going to have to stop being perverted." 29. Defendant Neptune Township and its agents within the Neptune Police Department have engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of harassment, disparate treatment, discrimination, and retaliation against Plaintiffs. These behaviors have created a hostile work environment for Plaintiffs. 30. For example and without limitation, agents of the Township have routinely denied Plaintiffs training, promotion, and special assignments. 31. Defendants Adams and Hunt have refused to submit Plaintiff Gonzalez for valor awards but have submitted names of male officers who have exhibited similar acts of bravery and exceptional service. 6

7 32. In the entire history of the Neptune Police Department, no woman has ever been promoted. 33. Defendant Neptune Police Department employs only five (5) female officers. In the last three (3) years Defendant Neptune has hired 22 officers. Only three (3) are women. 34. Defendant Neptune has repeatedly violated its own Standard Operating Procedures and Ordinances in order to promote males over females. 35. Plaintiffs have been subjected to unfair assessments, arbitrary internal affairs investigations, discriminatory work assignments, discriminatory performance standards and evaluations, and more stringent scrutiny, monitoring and oversight. 36. Defendants negligently, recklessly and/or intentionally (a) failed to have in place a well publicized and enforced anti-harassment and anti-retaliation policy; (b) failed to properly train its employees regarding compliance with any anti-harassment and anti-retaliation policy; (c)failed to properly supervise its employees to ensure compliance with any anti-harassment and antiretaliation policy; (d) failed to make an unequivocal commitment from the top of the organization to any anti-harassment and anti-retaliation policy as not just words but backed up by consistent practice; and (e) failed to protect Plaintiffs from abuse, harassment, discrimination and retaliation in the workplace. 37. Defendant Township negligently, recklessly and/or intentionally failed to take prompt, appropriate and/or reasonable remedial steps to prevent, stop and remedy the harassment, discrimination and retaliation aimed at Plaintiffs. By and through its agents, Defendants fostered a discriminatory, harassing and retaliatory atmosphere and allowed actions, which consisted of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation in violation of the LAD. 7

8 38. Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department act through Plaintiffs' superior officers who are upper level managers and for whom Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have respondeat superior liability. 39. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Neptune's and Neptune Police Department's conduct, Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Savage have suffered and continue to suffer loss of earnings and other employment benefits, severe mental, physical and emotional distress, stress, humiliation, pain, damage to reputation and harm to their career development. 40. By and through the actions described herein, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of discrimination against Plaintiff Gonzalez and have created a harassing and hostile work environment for her because of her sex in violation of the LAD, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq. COUNT TWO (Retaliation Against Elena Gonzalez) 41. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege all the allegations as set forth in Count One as if fully set forth at length herein. 42. In April of 2013, Plaintiffs Savage and Gonzalez engaged in protected activity when they filed a charge of sex discrimination with the EEOC. 43. On or about May 7, 2013, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department learned of the EEOC complaints. 44. Instead of taking prompt remedial action, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department, through upper level managers Adams, Hunt and Emmons, publicized the complaints to members of the department. 8

9 45. After Plaintiff Gonzalez complained about the hostile work environment to Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department, through upper level managers Adams, Emmons, Captain Leather and Lt. McGhee, Defendants engaged in a campaign of retaliation that included but is not limited to unfairly scrutinizing her work product, altering her work assignments, unfairly evaluating her performance, denying her training, refusing to promote her, and subjecting her to further harassment. 46. On May 21, 2013, in further retaliation, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department, through upper level managers Adams and Hunt, removed Officer Gonzalez from the school resource position in Neptune High School and replaced her with a male officer, Kevin Schuster. 47. Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department, acting through upper level manager Emmons, also retaliated by removing additional school resource assignments and giving them to Gregory Washington. For example and without limitation, Washington was assigned to coordinate Project Graduation and to facilitate the police security at the high school graduation. Plaintiff Gonzalez was assigned to the high school, while Washington was assigned to the middle school. Yet, as part of their pattern and practice of discrimination and retaliation, Defendants marginalized Plaintiff Gonzalez and assigned high school tasks to a male officer. 48. In or about July of 2013, Officer Gonzalez complained about these and other retaliatory actions in a memorandum to Defendant Hunt her superior, the highest ranking officer in the department, and an upper level manager of Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department. 49. In response to her memorandum, Defendants Hunt and Emmons called Officer Gonzalez into a meeting. During the meeting, Defendant Hunt told Officer Gonzalez that "nothing is going to change" regarding the way he does assignments and promotions. When Officer Gonzalez 9

10 raised Defendant Emmons sexist, inappropriate and harassing behavior toward women, Hunt dismissed Officer Gonzalez's complaints. No discipline or investigation ensued. 50. On July 3, 2013, Plaintiff responded to a serious motor vehicle accident on Route 66 in a high traffic area. It was raining hard and several of the occupants of the vehicles involved were injured. Officer Gonzalez requested additional back up but none came. One officer drove by without stopping to help. Officer Gonzalez's sergeant went into headquarters rather than responding to render aid. 51. After the accident scene was cleared, in order to continue her investigation, Officer Gonzalez went to the Jersey Shore Medical Center where the victims of the accident were taken. She issued a summons to one of the drivers for failure to provide a vehicle registration. Shortly thereafter, she realized the registration document was attached to other documents. She went to police headquarters and told Sergeant Columbo of the error. She completed the requisite summons dismissal form which Sergeant Columbo approved and signed. 52. On July 9, 2013, Defendant Emmons interfered with the summons dismissal in order to harass and retaliate against Officer Gonzalez. Defendant Emmons ordered Sergeant Seidle to order Officer Gonzalez to issue the summons even though the registration was located. 53. Later that afternoon, Sergeant Seidle called Officer Gonzalez into the shift commander's office. Sergeant Seidle told Officer Gonzalez that Defendant Emmons now ordered her not to send the summons and to complete the summons dismissal report again and resubmit it. 54. On July 10, 2013, Sergeant Seidle again summoned Officer Gonzalez into the shift commander's office. He told her that Defendants Hunt and Emmons told him that Officer Gonzalez would be investigated for being deceptive on an official document and that she would likely be disciplined over the summons dismissal report. 10

11 55. Officer Gonzalez became physically ill from this ongoing harassment, retaliation and hostile work environment. She immediately told Sergeant Seidle that Defendants Emmons and Hunt were harassing and retaliating against her and that, as a result, she was experiencing abdominal pains. 56. Sergeant Seidle told Officer Gonzalez that he would record the incident as harassment and that her illness was related to the harassment. Officer Gonzalez left work and went to the doctor for medical treatment. 57. On July 12, 2013, Officer Gonzalez wrote to Defendant Neptune's Acting Police Director Michael Bascom about Defendants Hunt and Emmons using the internal affairs process of the Department to retaliate against and harass her. Bascom did not respond promptly or effectively. 58. On July 15, 2013, Acting Police Director Michael Bascom met with Officer Gonzalez. Officer Gonzalez told him that she was being harassed, discriminated against, and retaliated against. She described the incidents and behavior described in this Complaint. 59. Officer Gonzalez told Bascom about Defendant Emmons' ongoing offensive sexist and retaliatory behaviors as described herein. 60. On July 15, 2013, after her meeting with Bascom, Officer Gonzalez reported for duty. She was immediately ordered to meet with Lt. Fisher regarding an internal investigation generated by Emmons relating to the voided summons form of July 9, During their conversation, Fisher admitted to Officer Gonzalez that if she were a male officer who wrote a similar dismissal form there would not be a departmental complaint. Officer Gonzalez asked for legal representation. Fisher ignored her request and continued to ask questions relating to the retaliatory investigation started by Defendant Emmons. 11

12 62. In his meeting with Plaintiff Gonzalez, Fisher stated that defendant Hunt said that "if you [Officer Gonzalez] have to go home sick maybe you can't handle this job and maybe you need to go see a doctor to see if you are fit for duty." Fisher said Plaintiff Gonzalez should just "take it" when things like this happen. Fisher told Plaintiff Gonzalez "they [the department] will use it against you and send you to see a doctor to try to get rid of you." 63. After the conversation, Fisher ordered Plaintiff Gonzalez to fill out another dismissal form and write "officer error" on it or she would be brought up on charges of insubordination. Fisher also told Plaintiff Gonzalez that she was under investigation for a violation of the MVR (in car camera) policy for the same accident scene. Fisher also demanded a doctor's note for Officer Gonzalez's sick time. 64. On or about August 14, 2013, the Township received a letter from the attorneys representing Officers Gonzalez and Savage. Defendant Neptune, through Acting Police Director Bascom, assigned the "investigation" to the harasser, Defendant Hunt. 65. Defendant Hunt called Officer Gonzalez into his office. Armed with a copy of the letter from Plaintiff Gonzalez's attorneys, Hunt began to read from the letter and threaten Officer Gonzalez with discipline if she did not answer questions directly related to the allegations in the letter. 66. Shortly thereafter, the Township hired an outside investigator to investigate the allegations in the letter of representation. Nearly four (4) months later Plaintiffs have not be apprised of the results of the investigation and no remedial action has been taken. 67. On October 9, 2013, Officer Gonzalez submitted to Defendant Hunt a request to attend training to become a certified police instructor. Her request was ignored. She submitted a 12

13 second request for that training on November 20, 2013 along with additional training requests for On November 28, 2013, Defendant Hunt responded to Officer Gonzalez in a memorandum which stated that the department will "authorize officers in writing when they will be assigned to attend training or authorize them to be certified as instructors." Defendant Hunt did not authorize any training for Plaintiff Gonzalez. 69. In October of 2013, Defendant Emmons ordered Lt. Mangold to change Officer Gonzalez's performance evaluation from a positive evaluation to a negative evaluation. Again, the negative evaluation was immediately prior to an upcoming promotional process. 70. On October 30, 2013, when attending an interview by the investigator hired by the Township, Plaintiff Gonzalez was repeatedly questioned by Defendants Hunt and Emmons through Lt. Mangold about her location and her time. She was told by Lt. Mangold to report to work at 9 am then travel to the meeting in Montclair. Male officers were not given such orders. 71. Unlike male officers who were given time off to attend interviews by the Township representative, Plaintiffs were docked for the time, harassed about the time off, and threatened with discipline for attending a meeting called by an agent hired by the Defendant Neptune. 72. On or about November 19, 2013, in further retaliation, Officer Gonzalez was removed from the School Resource position effective January 6, She learned of this by reading the 2014 schedule posted in headquarters. Officer Gonzalez was replaced by a male officer. 73. Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department act through Plaintiffs' superior officers who are upper level managers and for whom Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have respondeat superior liability. 13

14 74. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Neptune's and Neptune Police Department's conduct, Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Savage have suffered and continue to suffer loss of earnings and other employment benefits, severe mental, physical and emotional distress, stress, humiliation, pain, damage to reputation and harm to their career development. 75. By and through the actions described herein, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of retaliation against Plaintiff Gonzalez in violation of the LAD, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq. COUNT THREE (Sex Discrimination Against Christine Savage) 76. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege all the allegations as set forth in Counts One and Two as if fully set forth at length herein. 77. Plaintiff Christine Savage has been an employee of the Neptune Police Department since her hiring as a patrol officer on January 5, Plaintiff Savage has witnessed and been subjected to the offensive, sexist, harassing, and retaliatory conduct described in Counts I and II. 79. On January 5, 1998, Plaintiff Savage began her career as a patrol officer. 80. Plaintiff Savage served as a patrol officer for 15 years until December of 2012 when she was assigned to the Detective Bureau. 81. From 1998 through 2012, Plaintiff Savage's performance evaluations were exemplary. 82. Plaintiff Savage received numerous commendations and a valor award for her work and was recognized by other law enforcement agencies as an excellent professional. 14

15 83. Throughout her career plaintiff Savage witnessed and was subjected to countless acts of discrimination. For example and without limitation, plaintiff Savage has been routinely denied training, special assignments, promotion, recognition, and other notable career building and financial opportunities. 84. Plaintiff Savage was a candidate for promotion to the rank of sergeant on at least six occasions during the past ten years. Each time she was denied promotion. 85. For example and without limitation, on or about December 3, 2012, Defendant Neptune made promotions to the position of sergeant. Despite her superior qualifications and years of service with the department, Plaintiff Savage was not promoted. Instead, Defendant Neptune promoted seven (7) males and assigned Plaintiff Savage to the detective bureau. 86. Within the first three months of Plaintiff Savage's assignment to the detective bureau, she was harassed, marginalized and shunned. Her performance was placed under a microscope by supervisors in contrast to her male counterparts. 87. For example and without limitation: a. Lt. McGhee regularly asked Plaintiff Savage if she felt she was "up for this position." b. McGhee repeatedly told Plaintiff Savage her reports "weren't good at all." c. In contrast, Plaintiff Savage's male counterparts were provided "report scripts" and mentors as soon as they were assigned to the detective bureau. McGhee did not provide Plaintiff Savage with "report scripts," mentor her, or assign a mentor to her to aid in her development as a detective. Instead he humiliated her in front of her peers. Three (3) months after her assignment to the bureau, she finally received scripts. 15

16 d. McGhee scrutinized Detective Savage's reporting time. She was chastised for arriving two minutes late when male detectives arrive late and leave early without such public criticism. e. Detective Savage was denied training and schooling. For example, she asked to attend statement analysis and other relevant courses for detective work. Male detectives were given training. For example, a male detective, who was assigned to the detective bureau after Detective Savage, was sent to many trainings not provided to Plaintiff Savage. 88. In or about March of 2013, another opportunity for promotion to the position of sergeant was posted. 89. Despite her qualifications and seniority, Detective Savage was again passed over for promotion. In this case, Officer Savage was senior to twelve of the thirteen eligible candidates. 90. On or about April 22, 2013, Defendants promoted two less-qualified males. 91. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Neptune's and Neptune Police Department's conduct, Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Savage have suffered and continue to suffer loss of earnings and other employment benefits, severe mental, physical and emotional distress, stress, humiliation, pain, damage to reputation and harm to their career development. 92. Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department act through Plaintiffs' superior officers who are upper level managers and for whom Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have respondeat superior liability. 93. By and through the actions described herein, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of discrimination against Plaintiff 16

17 Savage and have created a harassing and hostile work environment for her because of her sex in violation of the LAD, N.J.SA. 10:5-1 et seq. COUNT FOUR (Retaliation Against Christine Savage) 94. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege all the allegations as set forth in Counts One through Three as if fully set forth at length herein. 95. In April of 2013, Plaintiffs Savage and Gonzalez engaged in protected activity when they filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. 96. On or about May 7, 2013, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department learned of the EEOC complaints. 97. Instead of taking prompt remedial action, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department, through upper level managers Adams, Hunt and Emmons, publicized the complaints to members of the department. 98. On May 8, 2013, Defendant Hunt walked through the detective bureau acknowledging all officers present except Plaintiff Savage. This type of shunning continues to this day. 99. On or about May 24, 2013, Sergeant Colombo and Sergeant Damico told officers during a roll call briefing that two EEOC complaints were filed against the department. They went on to tell the officers that one of the officers who filed a complaint went home sick on that day. Plaintiff Savage was the only officer who had gone home sick on that day On or about May 24, 2013, Plaintiff Savage filed a report with Lieutenant McGhee detailing the harassment and retaliation she was experiencing after the Township disclosed that she filed an EEOC complaint. 17

18 On May 27, 2013, Defendants Adams and Hunt called Plaintiff Savage into a meeting to discuss the May 24, 2013 memorandum. Plaintiff Savage asked for PBA representation. Officer Gonzalez, in her capacity as a PBA representative, came to the meeting Throughout the meeting, Defendant Adams referred to both women as "girls" and "ladies." 103. Although Defendants Adams and Hunt had personally witnessed or engaged in the behavior described above and below, Plaintiffs told Adams and Hunt about illegal, sexist, and improper behavior by male officers, including but not limited to: a. Emmons sending pornography to male officers; b. Emmons gesturing as if he was masturbating and shooting at officers with his penis saying "Pow, pow, pow;" c. Emmons' offensive and sexist remarks, such as his announcing in front of Plaintiffs and other officers that he had "fisted" another officer's wife; d. The "I 'heart' penis" sticker that was placed on Officer Gonzalez's patrol car; e. The overall inappropriate behavior of male officers during briefing such as sexist comments about women; f. Unfair assignments and favoritism for male officers; and g. Unfair discipline and use of IA process to retaliate and marginalize women Defendant Adams responded to Plaintiffs complaints of harassment and discrimination by stating: "you know, this is a male dominated field" and it is "not going to change." 105. Neither the Department nor the Township attempted to take prompt and effective remedial action. 18

19 106. On July 9, 2013, as further retaliation, Plaintiff Savage was home on sick leave when she was "visited" by Sergeant Baldwin Baldwin was sent to Plaintiff's home by Defendant Hunt to harass and retaliate against Plaintiff Savage On August 21, 2013, Detective Savage arrived at work and Sergeant Baldwin and Lt. McGhee deliberately shunned her by closing the door to her office while leaving the doors to the other detectives offices open October 29, 2013, Plaintiff Savage received an unfair and retaliatory performance review from Lt. McGhee and Sergeant Baldwin Throughout the performance review meeting McGhee and Baldwin demeaned Detective Savage and repeatedly asked her if she was going to cry When Detective Savage confronted McGhee about the low rating he said "I have to answer to him now," indicating he was speaking about Defendant Hunt Detective Savage subsequently asked McGhee about attending schools to aid in her improvement as a detective. McGhee told her that Defendant Hunt told him that "she would not be going to schools for right now." 113. On October 30, 2013, when attending an interview by the investigator hired by the Township to investigate the Plaintiff's complaints, Plaintiff Savage was repeatedly questioned by Lt. McGhee about her location and her time. Male officers who participated in the interviews were not harassed in this manner Unlike male officers who were given time off to attend interviews by the Township, Plaintiffs were docked for the time, harassed about the time off, and threatened with discipline for attending a meeting called by an agent hired by the Defendant Township. 19

20 115. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Neptune's and Neptune Police Department's conduct, Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Savage have suffered and continue to suffer loss of earnings and other employment benefits, severe mental, physical and emotional distress, stress, humiliation, pain, damage to reputation and harm to their career development Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department act through Plaintiffs' superior officers who are upper level managers and for whom Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have respondeat superior liability By and through the actions described herein, Defendants Neptune and Neptune Police Department have engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of retaliation against Plaintiff Savage in violation of the LAD, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq. COUNT FIVE (Aiding and Abetting Discrimination Against Plaintiffs) 118. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations contained in Counts One through Four as if fully set forth at length herein The LAD prohibits conduct that aids or abets unlawful discrimination and retaliation Defendants Adams, Hunt, and Emmons are upper level managers and decisionmakers regarding plaintiffs Defendants Adams, Hunt, and Emmons intentionally aided and abetted discrimination and harassment in violation of LAD, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1, et seq Defendants Adams, Hunt, and Emmons intentionally aided and abetted retaliation against plaintiffs because of their opposition to sex discrimination, harassment and retaliation in violation of the LAD, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1, et seq. 20

21 123. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Adams', Hunt's and Enunons's conduct, Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Savage have suffered and continue to suffer loss of earnings and other employment benefits, severe mental, physical and emotional distress, stress, humiliation, pain, damage to reputation and harm to their career development. WHEREFORE, cause having been shown, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants and seek the following relief: (a) Compensatory damages for loss of wages and benefits, pension losses, pain, suffering, stress, humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional harm; (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Damages for harm to reputation and career development; Reimbursement for medical expenses; Punitive damages; Attorneys' fees, interest and costs of suit; Injunctive relief requiring remediation of defendants' discrimination and retaliation; and (g) Such other relief as the Court may deem equitable and just. SMITH MULLIN, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs NANCY ERIKA SMITH Dated: December 9,

22 JURY DEMAND Plaintiffs demand trial by jury with respect to all issues that are so triable. SMITH MULLIN, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: December 9, 2013 NANCY ERIKA SMITH CERTIFICATION Pursuant to New Jersey Court Rule 4:5-1, counsel for plaintiffs hereby certify that to their knowledge, no matter related to this one is currently pending in either arbitration or litigation. SMITH MULLIN, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: December 9, 2013 NANCY ERIKA SMITH 22