Exhibit - Lewisboro Ledger

Transcription

Peter D. Hoffman, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
200 Katonah Ave
Katonah, NY 10526
(914) 232-2242
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW YORK
WESTCHESTER COUNTY
Kristin M. Peterson,
NDEX NO.:
Plaintiffs,
SUMMONS
-againstKatonah Lewisboro School District;
Katonah Lewisboro School District
Board of Education, Paul Kreutzer,
Superintendent of Schools, Katonah
Lewisboro School District, in his
individual and corporate capacity;
Connie Hayes, Director of Special
Services, Katonah Lewisboro School
District, in her individual and
corporate capacity; Jessica Godin, a
Principal of Katonah Elementary
School, in her individual and
corporate capacity; unknown agents
and assigns of Katonah Lewisboro
School District,
Defendant
To:
Katonah Lewisboro School District,
Katonah Lewisboro School District Board of Education,
Paul Kreutzer,
Connie Hayes,
Jessica Godin,
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the Complaint in this action
and to serve a copy of your Answer, or, jf the Complaint is not served with this
Summons, to serve a Notice of Appearaoca, on the undersigned Attomeys for Plaintiffs
within 20 days after tbe service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service (or
within 30 days after the service is complete if this Summons is not personally delivered
to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer,
judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded herein.
The basis of the venue designated is based upon CPLR § 503 (a), the residence
of Plaintiff Kristin Peterson.
ADDRESS OF DEFENDANT:
P.O. Box 387
Katonah, NY 10536
Dated: November 29, 2012
Katonah, NY
Law Office of Peter D. Hoffman, P.C.
By:
$,,-1.) cj'-AU/lA
.<
Giulia Frasca, Esq.
Law Office of Peter D. Hoffman, PC
Attorneys for Plaintiff
200 Katonah Avenue
Katonah, NY 10536
(914) 232-2242
----~.--
Peter D. Hoffman, Esq.
Giulia Frasca, Esq.
law Office of Peter D. Hoffman, P.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
200 Katonah Ave.
Katonah, NY 10536
(914) 232-2242
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK
WESTCHESTER COUNTY
Kristin M. Peterson,
Plaintiffs,
INDEX NO.:
COMPLAINT
-againstKatonah Lewisboro School District;
Board of Education, Paul Kreutzer,
Superintendent of Schools, Katonah
Lewisboro School DistriCt, in his
individual and corporate capacity;
Connie Hayes, Director of Special
Services, Katonah Lewisboro Schoo
District, in her individual and
corporate capacity; Jessica Godin,
as Principal of Katonah Elementary
School, in her individual and
corporate capacity; unknown agents
and assigns of Katonah Lewisboro
School District,
Defendants
COMPLAINT
INTRODUCTION AND NATURE OF ACTION
1. Plaintiff Kristin Peterson's (hereinafter "Peterson" or "Plaintiff") claims arise out of a
most egregious form of discriminatory conduct perpetrated on Plaintiff by
Defendants Katonah LewisbOr<l School District (hereinafter "KLSD"), KlSD Board of
Page I of 46
Education (hereinafter 'KLSDBOE"), Paul Kreutzer, Superintendent of Schools,
KLSD (hereinafter "Kreutzer"), in his individual and corporate capacity, Connie
Hayes, Director of Special Services, KLSD (hereinafter "Hayes"), in her individual
and corporate capacity, unknown agents and assigns of KLSD. Plaintiff was
subjected to unlawful discrimination in her employment as based on her age,
gender, disability and in retaliation for Peterson's advocacy on behalf of special
needs students in her charge. Plaintiff's claims include but are not limited to prima
facie tort, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, negligent
supervision, negligent hiring, retaliation, hostile work environment, discrimination
based on disability, discrimination based on gender, violations of civil rights under
both the state and federal law, violation of her civil rights as pursuant to New York
Executive Law § 296, et seq., violation of her civil rights as pursuant to New York
Labor Law § 215, New York Labor Law § 740, violation of her civil rights as pursuant
to Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 USCS § 12203, violation of her civil rights as
pursuant to False Claims Act, 31 USCA § 3729, et. seq., New York False Claims Act
§ 187, et. seq. and Constructive Discharge. Plaintiff, by her attomeys, Law Office of
Peter D. Hoffman, P.C., complaining of Defendants, alleges as follows:
PARTIES
2. Plaintiff Peterson is a resident of North Whtte Plains, NY with a place of residence at
51} McDougal Drive, North White Plains, NY 10603. Peterson is a female over the
age of forty with a disabitity who was hired as a social worker by Defendant KLSD in
1997. See Exhibit "A, "Resume' of Kristin Peterson. FHlm 1997 to the present,
Peterson worked at KLSD as an elemental)' and middle school social worker. In Fall
Page 2 of 46
2011, she was falsely accused of mishandling a special needs child in her charge
and was reassigned to the District Office and then to her home. See Exhibit, "B,"
Letter from Carol Ann Lee to Peterson Reassigning Her to Home Duty dated
October 21, 2011. On January 26, 2012, she returned to work under the threat that
a false, retaliatory and injurious Holt letter would be placed in her file. See Exhibit
"C," Letter from Carol Ann Lee to Peterson Instructing Her to Return to Work Dated
January 25,2012.
3. Defendant KLSD is a local school district situated in a suburban community of
21,000 people located in Westchester County, NY. The school district serves
students living within the towns of Cross River, Goldens Bridge, Katonah, Lewisboro,
North Salem, Pound Ridge, Purdys, South Salem, Waccabuc and Vista. Its
administrative offices are located at P.O. Box 387, Katonah, NY 10536.
4. Defendant KLSD BOE is the board of education for the above mentioned KLSD,
located at P.O. Box 387, Katonah, NY 10536. The KLSD BOE members include:
Mark Lipton, Charles Day, Peter Breslin, Janet Harckham, Marjorie Schiff, Stephanie
Tobin and Peter Treyz.
5.
Dr. Paul Kreutzer is the Superintendent of Schools for KLSD.
6.
Connie Hayes is the Director of Special Services at KLSD.
7.
Unknown and unnamed agents and assigns of KLSD were also involved in this
matter. AI all relevant times Unknown Defendant agents and assigns were
acting under color of state law and within the scope of their capacity as
employees of KLSD.
Page 3-of 46
JURISDICTION
7.
Jurisdiction of this court is invoked pursuant to Plaintiffs' place of
residence being 50 McDougal Drive, North Whtte Plains, NY 10603.
FACTS
PERSONAL HISTORY AND EXPERIENCE
8.
Plaintiff Peterson currently is employed as a social worker by Defendant KLSD.
Her claims stem from a pattern and practice of discriminatory behavior
perpetrated upon her by Defendants, their agents and assigns.
9.
With regard to academic experience, Peterson attended the College of New
Rochelle where she received a B.S.W. in 1988.
10.
She then attended the New York University (NYU) Ehrenkranz School of Social
Work where she obtained an M.S.W. in 1989.
11.
She also is a Ph.D. candidate in Clinical Social Work from the Ehrenkranz School
of Social Work at New York University.
12.
From 1994-1997 she was a field work instructor at NYU.
13.
From 1993-2004, she was adjunct faculty in the Social Work Department at
the College of New Rochelle.
14.
From 1997-2005, she served as adjunct faculty at the Fordham University
Graduate School of Social Work. See Exhibit "A, " Resume' of Kristin
Peterson.
15.
With regard to professional experience, she worked at Jewish Child Care
Association as a primary therapist for latent and adolescent boys and their
families frorrr1989-1991.
Page 4 of 46
16.
From 1991-1997, she worked at the Julia Dyckman Andrus Memorial in
Yonkers, NY, first as a primary therapist for emotionally disturbed adolescent
males from 1991-1993 and then as the Program Director for day treatment
services from July 1993-June 1997.
17.
She was hired by KLSD commencing with the 1997 school year as a social
worker. See Exhibit "A, " Resume" of Kristin Peterson.
18.
From 1997 to the present, she worked at KLSD as an elementary and middle
school social worker.
19.
In 1998, Peterson was diagnosed with an anaplastic astrocytoma grade 3
brain tumor, which was invasive and advanced. She was given little chance
of survival at Sloan Kettering where she received treatment. Subsequently,
she developed Hodgkin's Disease. From the illnesses and treatment
(surgery, chemotherapy and radiation), Peterson was left with several
disabilities. Peterson's disabilities are not readily apparent. She is visually
impaired. She lacks peripheral vision and has chronic blunry vision in her
right eye as a result of the tumor growing into the optic nerve and radiation
damage.
20.
Due to her visual impainments, Peterson finds it stressful and challenging to
drive at night, particularly with inclement weather or when she is fatigued.
Peterson is very careful with planning night time tlriving and win not drive on
unfamiliar roads, or for more than a half an hour.
21.
Peterson suffers from compromised equilibrium.
Page 5 of 46
22.
Peterson's body's ability to regulate its temperature has been compromised
and she must dress in such a way as to prevent overheating. She easily
becomes dehydrated and can experience severe heat exhaustion.
23.
KLSD, at all times, was aware of Peterson's disabilities as she was an
employee when she became ill and through her recovery.
PATTERN AND PRACTICE OF DISCRIMINATORY AND TORTIOUS CONDUCT BY
KLSD AGAINST PETERSON RELEVANT TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION
24.
KLSD has engaged in a pattern and practice of discriminatory, tortious and
wrongful conduct against Peterson.
25.
On August 26,2011, Peterson received an email asking her to meet with
Defendant Connie Hayes, Director of Special Services, at 10:00am, a half
hour before a scheduled CSE meeting, on September 1, 2011. Peterson
arrived at the appointed hour, but Defendant Hayes never met with the team
or staff.
26.
During her attendance at the September 1, 2011 CSE meeting, Peterson was
a strong advocate for the student. However, Ms. Emily Lucas, district
counsel, insulted staff who are familiar with the students. Peterson
confronted Ms. Lucas regarding her behavior. Both Ms. Lucas and
Defendant Hayes took retaliatory steps against Peterson at this meeting and
following this meeting. Peterson met Defendant Hayes for the first time at
this meeting.
27.
On September 14, 2011, Peterson initiated a meeting with Oefendant Hayes
10 discuss the tension fett at the CSE meeting on September 1, 2011.
Page 6 of 46
28.
On September 15, 2011, Peterson met with Defendant Hayes alone because
both Defendant Hayes and Ms. Sandra Grebinar, Peterson's union
representative, decided it was not necessary to have union representation
present.
29.
Peterson tried to explain both her position concerning the CSE meeting to
Defendant Hayes and her absence from an earlier social worker and
psychologist meeting because of a personal emergency. Within moments,
Defendant Hayes accused Peterson of lying, called her a liar and then
informed her that "this meeting is over."
30.
Immediately thereafter, the fire alarm rang and everyone evacuated the
building. Afterwards, Peterson stopped by Defendant Hayes' office to
continue the meeting, but Defendant Hayes refused to answer Peterson so
she left.
31.
On September 16, 2011, Defendant Hayes sent out an email saying she will
meet with the principals and determine if the after school hours can be used
to add 2 hours of staff development time or the 5 hour independent work
time.
32.
At this time, Peterson already had a proposal for her 5-hour plan to create a
curriculum utilizing Aesop's Fables to teach social skills and had already met
with Carolann Castellano, Principal of Meadow Pond Elementary School,
and lara Monasch, Psychologist at Meadow Pond, to establish the plan.
33.
On September 19, 2(}11, Peterson emailed Ms. Grebinar and Defendant
Hayes at 8:45am explaining that she had already met with Ms_ CasteHano,
Page 7 of 46
Ms. Monasch and Dawn Pomeroy, Teacher on Special Assignment, at
Meadow Pond, to develop the Aesop's Fable curriculum. The plan included
five hours of after-school contract hour time.
34.
Later on September 19, 2011, Defendant Hayes sent an email at 5:44pm
confirming that the after school time could be used for 2 hours of professional
development, but a written proposal was required explaining how the time
would be used.
35.
On September 20, 2011, Peterson had to leave a meeting early because she
had a prior commitment. This meeting was established less than one week
ahead of schedule and was not scheduled on a regular meeting day, Monday
afternoons. In fact, most recipients did not see the email until the morning of
September 20, 2011 and two other colleagues left soon after Peterson did.
Furthermore, it was not sanctioned until well after the workday on Monday
September 19, 2011 at 5:44PM, when Defendant Hayes informed Peterson
that she was approved for the exchange of time.
36.
On September 22, 2011, Defendant Hayes sent out an email confirming
another meeting scheduled for September 27,2011 from 2:30 - 4:30.
Atthough several colleagues emailed that they had prior commitments and
might be late or leave a bit early from the meeting, no one but Peterson was
chastised.
37.
During the first 2 weeks of school, staff was instructed to come to work on
time, sign in and out, and to be cognizant of proper attire.
Page 80f 4.6
38.
On September 22, 2011, Peterson scheduled a meeting with Carol Ann Lee
to discuss the dynamic with Defendant Hayes and to present a
docto~s
note
regarding her "accommodations." These accommodations were in place
since 1999. Previously, no one ever questioned Peterson's attire, or her
keeping early hours and carefully scheduling and attending evening
programs. In fact, Peterson endured her cancer treatment during her three
years awaiting tenure and was granted tenure with no reservations.
39.
On September 23, 2011 Ms. Lee's office e-mailed Peterson to cancel the
meeting.
40.
On the same date, Peterson was accused of inappropriate conduct toward a
KLSD student in her charge, FA
41.
Peterson knew and worked with Student FA for approximately five (5) years.
Student FA presents on the autistic spectrum, but he is functional. Student
FA has a fear of automatic flushing toilets. On September 23, 2011,
Student FA showed visible signs of needing to use the bathroom, and
Peterson was asked to assist him in the Health Center after he became
anxious. Peterson placed her left hand on top of his right shoulder and held
his right hand with her free hand in order to guide him to the stall.
42.
Peterson then released FA and poured a cup of water into the toilet to show
Student FA that the toilet would not flush. With each demonstration Student
FA got closeruntil he stepped toward the stall on his own. Student FA
then returned to class.
Page 9 of 46
43.
Defendant Hayes then appeared and escorted Peterson into the Principal's
office. When they were in the office Defendant Hayes falsely and maliciously
accused Peterson of "manhandling" and "dragging" the child, and telephoned
KLSD.
44.
Ms. Karen Greenwood, the school nurse, witnessed Peterson's entire
interaction with Student FA Upon information and belief, both Ms.
Greenwood and Peterson drafted similar statements regarding the incident.
believe our statements are similar.
45.
Defendant Hayes did not draft a statement and FA was never assessed or
evaluated by the school nurse.
46.
When Peterson left the building at 3:45pm, Defendant Hayes had not yet
wrillen her statement. Peterson was told to report to the District Office on
Monday September 26 and she did so.
47.
On September 28,2011, Peterson received a leller to report to the District
Office. See Exhibit, "8," Leller from Carol Ann Lee to Peterson Reassigning
Her to Home Duty dated October 21,2011. She asked Ms. Lee if this
re-assignment only pertained to the intervention on Friday September 23,
2011 and she said ''yes'' as was witnessed by Ms. Sandra Grebinar,local
union representative and former President. Late that afternoon, on or about
2:30pm, after sitting in the District Office for the entire day and notdoing
much else, Peterson rested her head in her arms and closed her eyes. She
did not fall asleep, but had nothing to do, was alone and began to feel the
effects of emotional distress caused by the Defendants' actions. Ms. lee
Page 10 of 46
approached Peterson to speak to her. Peterson stated that she was feeling
physically fine, but that she was overtired and grieving from having had to put
her pet cat to sleep and having to support her grieving son.
48.
On October 7,2011, Peterson received a letter from Defendants to report for
a psychiatric evaluation by Dr. Allen Reichman on October 13, 2011 at
11 :OOam. At the evaluation, Dr. Reichman appeared surprised that Peterson
did not know why she was there. The reasons he gave were: (1) refused to
leave a meeting with Ms. Hayes, which is untrue; (2) wearing shorts (besides
there being no dress code, Defendant has a letter from Peterson's doctor
explaining her need for accommodations related to clothing); (3) fell asleep at
the district office, which is untrue; and (3) the intervention with FA on
September 23,2011. Peterson was shocked to learn of these false and
malicious accusations.
49.
Dr. Reichman administered a standardized instrument that was a Xerox copy
of the protocol. Upon information and belief, this is not in accordance with
standard practice. Thus, upon information and belief, the results of
Peterson's evaluation by Dr. Reichman are invalid.
50.
On October 21, 2011, Peterson received a hand delivered letter that, as of
that day, she was re-assigned to home with full-pay and beneflls: Also on
October 21, she was directed to attend a meeting on October 26, 2Dl1 at the
District Office with Christopher Powers, counsel for Defendant KLSD, and
Carol Ann Lee, Director of Human Resources for KLSD.
Page II of 46
51.
On October 26,2011, Peterson attended a meeting at the District Office. Ms.
Grebinar, NYSUT local president and Christopher Powers, counsel for
Defendants, were also present. Peterson was given a letter to read that
threatened her with a "30-20A" hearing, unless Peterson agreed to sign the
letter and follow several stipulations, which included (1) attend counseling,
(2) pay a $5,000.00 fine, (3) stay away from Student FA, and (4) if she was
ever "in trouble again," she would be terminated. Tne same letter falsely and
maliciously accused Peterson of "grabb[ing] a special needs student and
draggling] him across the floor to the bathroom".
52.
Peterson asked for a copy of the letter, but this simple request was refused.
Mr. Powers did not allow her to take a copy of the letter, containing false,
malicious accusations. Peterson was told to provide a response to this letter
by November 2, 2011 or it would be presented to the Board of Education
("BOE") on November 3, 2011. Peterson did not provide said response.
Peterson had no knowledge of whether this letter was presented to the BOE.
53.
On November 16 and 17, 2011, Ms. Grebinar made contact with Ms. Lee
regarding Peterson's attendance at the Crisis Intervention Training scheduled
for November 18, 2011. Peterson was already signed up and approved. Ms.
Lee replied that she could not attend and that "Alice Cronin said that the
training was primarily for teaching assistants." However, Peterson had an
email of the invitees to this training and sixteen (16) out of the twenty-two
(22) individuals were professionar staff: general education teachers, special
education teachers, speech teachers, social workers, ,psychologists, and
Page 1-2 of 46
nurses. See Exhibit "D," Crisis Intervention Training E-mail with Scheduling
Information dated 110911.
54.
On November 16, 2011, Peterson viewed her file at the district office. She
numbered each page on the bottom right hand corner and wrote a detailed
log of each page/item. Mrs. Sy Lynch, Secretary, Human Resources, signed
Peterson's log as she was witness to the review. Peterson asked her if there
was a second file and she said, "no this is complete".
55.
During Peterson's time at the District Office, Peterson was given nothing to
do and had no responsibilities despite her many qualifications, skills and
experience. Peterson did choose to compile Aesop's Fable curriculum, work
with Lara Monasch, School Psychologist, to finalize the 5-hour proposal
(through the computer).
56.
Also, on the morning after a tragic murder-suicide of a local family, Peterson
was asked by numerous District Office staff "why" she was not helping in the
crisis response. It was clearly upsetting to several individuals, who are also
local taxpayers, that she was not allowed to engage in the crisis intervention.
Mr. Michael Jumper, Assistant Superintendent for Business then asked
Peterson to research crisis intervention.
57.
Since her employment by KLSD in 1997 through receiving her tenure in 2000
and unt~ she spoke out against Defendant KLSD staff and its attorney, Emily
Lucas, Peterson had never been disciplined and no grievance was ever filed
against her. She also JlelIer had a negative or punitive letter placed in her
personal file. As a direct result of speaking out at the September 1, l{)11
PageD of 46
-------
CSE meeting, in the appropriate educational and social needs of the student,
Peterson was punished and hum~iated by Defendants.
58.
On November 30, 2011, after submission of her Notice of Claim submitted on
November 23, 2011, Peterson was made aware that Defendant Kreutzer
made threatening statements that if she did not withdraw her Notice of Claim,
he would initiate a 3020a hearing. Although he could have initiated such a
hearing weeks before, such threats were made as a direct resuU of and in
utter retaliation for serving the Notice of Claim.
59.
Peterson was allowed to return to work in January of 2012 and she finished
the 2011-12 school year in her position as Social Worker for Defendant
KLSD after she was given a damaging Holt letter.
60.
Once she returned to work, Peterson had no supervision.
61.
Defendant Hayes met with the Social Workers at KLSD three times during
the entire year although she was supposed to meet with the Department on a
monthly basis. Defendant Hayes neglected her duties and did not follow her
job description.
62.
Peterson was routinely singled out for things that were not a violation of the
code of conduct or any other regulation at KLSD. In fact, her peers routinely
did such things and were not penalized or reprimanded. Peterson, on the
other hand was singled out for leaving meetings well after the end of the work
day, not being able to accommodate a meeting because Defendant Hayes
sent out the meeting noliceemail weH after 5:00 PM).
Page 14 of 46
63.
Furthermore, Peterson never received any training upon her retum nor did
any Defendant representative speak to her about how to function when she
retumed.
64.
On February 7,2012, Peterson received a letter of oounsel, or Holt letter,
from Jessica Godin, the principal at Katonah Elementary School. This letter
included numerous malicious lies and distortions of fact. The letter was hand
delivered moments before Peterson was leaving to attend her mother's
funeral. Jessica Godin knew she was attending her mother's funeral and
chose to deliver this hostile malicious, fabricated statement nonetheless.
65.
In a letter dated February 15, 2012 Peterson provided a response to said
letter that included 19 points of fact.
66.
In early Spring of 2012, Peterson applied to attend a five (5) day Therapeuic
Crisis Intervention ('TCI") training in Rhode Island, but was denied the
training by Defendant KLSD. Then in April of 2012, Peterson was authorized
by Defendant KLSD to attend the five (5) day TCI training held in Ithaca, NY
in August 2012. Peterson coordinated her summer plans around the dates,
but two weeks prior to the TCI training, Defendant KLSD denied her the
attendance.
67.
On May 31,2012, Peterson met with Defendant Hayes, Carolann Castellano,
Principal of Meadow Pond Elementary School and Ms. Grebinar. Ms. Hayes
scheduled this meetin,g to discussed Peterson's tentative social work
assignment for 2012-13. At this meeting, Ms. Hayes was highly
complimentary of Peterson both professionally and personally. Ms. Hayes
Page 15 of 46
also informed Peterson that she would assume district-wide Case History
responsibilities.
68.
On or about June I, 2012, Peterson received a memorandum dated June I,
2012 from Ms. Lee informing her that the Office of Human Resources and
Building Principals had determined that her 'tentative assignment" for the
2012-13 school year would be: "Social Worker Case Histories K-12.
69.
In a letter dated June 21,2012, Ms. Grebinar informed Ms. Carol Ann Lee
that Peterson was pleased to assume the district-wide Case History
assignment. In this letter, Ms. Grebinar also addressed a number of
concerns Peterson had: a Board of Education resolution appointing her to
this role, flexible work hours to meet the requirements of the new
assignment, a written understanding that she would need to interface with
parents, students and faculty at all six (6) district schools and remuneration,
at her salaried, hourly rate of pay for work and training sessions scheduled
above and beyond her contracted hours.
70.
In the June 21, 2012 letter, Ms. Grebinar stated that Respondent Hayes'
praise was juxtaposed with the events of September 23, 2011, described
above, wherein Ms. Hayes falsely and maliciously accused Peterson of child
abuse. As such, Peterson requested that all documentary references to the
events of September 23, 2011 and thereafter be expunged from her
personnel file, that she be compensated for all legal fees incurred and paid
because it was necessary to hire an attorney to represent herself inihe face
of these false and maficious accusations, and that she receive financial
Page 16 of 46
compensation for all damages as a result of Ms. Hayes' vengeful, false and
malicious accusations and confabulations.
71.
In a letter dated June 26, 2012, Respondent Kreutzer informed Peterson that
they had decided that my assignment would remain as "social
worke~'
at
Katonah and Meadow Pond Elementary Schools.
72.
In a letter to Ms. Grebinar dated July 6,2012, in response to her June 21,
2012 letter, Respondent Kreutzer informed Ms. Grebinar that Peterson's
change of assignment had been revoked and the demands of Ms. Grebinar's
June 21,2012 letter were denied.
73.
Furthermore, Respondent Kreutzer falsely and maliciously stated that
Peterson's behavior at a June 21,2012 meeting was disruptive and
unprofessional, and that Peterson made an insulting statement. In a letter
dated July 8, 2012, Peterson responded to his distortions of the truth as to
what transpired at the June 21,2012 meeting. Peterson was not, in fact,
disruptive or unprofessional, and Peterson never made the insulting
comments he accused her of making. Peterson's change in assignment was
directly related to the September 23, 2011 incident. Since Respondent
Kreutzer never communicated with Peterson about the intervention, she took
the opportunity to discuss it with him. However, he continually interrupted
her and talked over her, all in an effort to silence her.
74.
In a memorandum dated August 1, 2012, Peterson was informed by Scott
Persampieri thatthe social work assignments had been iinalized and that her
assignment would be a Social Workers Case Histories K-12 at Katonah
Page 17 of 46
----------
------------ ---------
Elementary and Meadow Pond Elementary Schools. This is the job
assignment that was discussed althe May 31,2012 meeting with
Respondent Hayes and Ms. CasteHano and then confirmed with my
assignment letter dated June 1,2012. These repeated assignment changes
are hostile actions and interfere with Peterson's ability to plan and be goal
oriented with regard to her job assignment and to provide appropriate
services to disabled students as required by federal and state law.
75.
During the second week in August, Peterson contacted Respondent Hayes
regarding her expenses for the TCI training. She informed Peterson, via
email, that since they had not figured out how to train the staff, they were not
training anyone else at this time. Hence, Peterson was denied training.
Furthermore, it was hostile and abusive to not let Peterson know sooner that
such a decision had been made.
76.
Peterson received an email from Ms. Castellano dated August 28,2012 that
states her Tentative Schedule for 2012-2013. Peterson's schedule stated as
follows: Monday, Wednesday and Friday at Meadow Pond, Tuesday and
Thursday at Katonah Elementary School. Peterson spoke with Ms.
Castellano and explained that this was not appropriate given the numbers of
IEP students with counseling services. Ms. Carolann Castellano responded
that Defendant Hayes had provided her with inaccurate information.
77.
Peterson sent an email, dated August 28, 2012 to Ms. Castellano, Defendant
Godin and Defendant Hayes identitying the specific number of counseling
sessions and the correct TUlrnber of students. Peterson suggested the
Page 18 of 46
following schedule: Monday, Wednesday and Thursday at Katonah
Elementary School and Tuesday and Friday at Meadow Pond Elementary
School. The schedule Peterson suggested also made her available for
"Response To Intervention" meetings that are held in the respective
buildings. Denial of this schedule is further evidence of a hostile work
environment and an administration trying to deny Peterson access to
performing her job.
78.
Despite the resulting disabilities from her cancer treatments, Peterson has
functioned extremely well with few, but significant accommodations.
Defendants are well aware of Peterson's cancer history, treatment,
disabilities and accommodations. KLSD's failure to be aware of Peterson's
disabilities constttutes negligence and willful indifference. Peterson does not
function as a disabled person because, with said few accommodations and
careful heatth care, she functions typically.
79.
Defendants have discriminated against Peterson based on her visual and
physical disabilities as a result of cancer treatments. An example of this
would be Defendants' ignorance regarding her documented, medical need to
wear loose-fitting clothing, of which they complained despite the fact that
there was no dress code. Another example is Defendants' inflexibility
regarding
~er
inability ta attend evening programs, unless IT was carefully
planned, due to her documented nighttime visual impairments.
80.
Ultimately, Peterson was sick since 1998 and never had problems with KLSD
-before Defendants Hayes and Kreutzer were hired.
Page 19 of 46
81.
In addition to Defendants' retaliation against her for speaking out on behalf of
a student at the September 1, 2011 CSE meeting, Defendants continued to
retaliate against her for filing a Notice of Claim, and for filing an EEOC
charge. As further described herein, Defendant KLSDBOE was negligent in
the hiring of Defendants Kreutzer and Hayes. Furthermore, the BOE was
neg~gent
in their supervision of Defendant Kreutzer. Lastly, Defendants
KLSDBOE and Kreutzer were negligent in their supervision of Defendant
Hayes and Defendant Godin.
82.
Since January 2012, Peterson has sent numerous leiters to the Human
Resources Department at KLSD documenting the chronic retaliation,
harassment, avoidance tactics, and hostile sITuation that Defendant Hayes
and Jessica Godin created. Peterson sent extremely specific and timely
leiters regarding each incident to KLSD administrators. See ExhibIT "E,"
Continued Harassment of Kristin Peterson, by Jessica Godin leiter dtd
060412; Exhibit "F," Leiter to Ms. Schluter from Ms. Peterson dtd 041011;
Exhibit "G," Leiter to Mr. Kreutzer from Ms. Peterson dtd 070812 in response
to his leiter of 070612; Exhibit "H," Leiter to Ms. Hayes from Ms. Peterson
dtd 080112 re TCltraining; Exhibit "I," Leiter from K. Peterson to Mr.
Persampieri re teaching aSSignments for 201212013 dtd 20120827; ExhibIT
"J," Leiter from K. Peterson
to S. {>rebinar re filing a grievance against the
District dtd 20120905; Exhibit "K," .Lelter from KP to District did 20120929;
Exhibit "L," Leiter from KP 10 Godin dtd 20120921; Exhibit "M," Letler from K.
Peterson to J. Godin 20121011; Exhibit "N," Letters from K. Peterson to-J.
Page 20 of 46
Godin re retaliation 20121021; Exhibit "0" Leiter from Godin to Peterson re
services for "Paul" dated 101912 and Leiter from Peterson to Godin re
services provided to "Paul" dated 101912; Exhibit "P," leiter from Peterson to
Grebinar re Godin Harassment dated 051212; Exhibit "Q," Leiter from K.
Peterson to S. Persampieri re Harrassment 20121115; Exhibit "R," Peterson
notes on Interaction with Godin dated 111412; Exhibit "S," Leiter from K.
Peterson to S. Persampieri re C. Scaglione call 20121120; Exhibit "T," letter
from Peterson to S. Persampieri re Crisis Training dated 112712.
83.
Principal Godin, in particular, since September2012 has been repeatedly
hostile to Peterson. She avoids communications with her and she has
retaliated on numerous occasions, routinely and purposefully making a paint
to circumvent Peterson's professional influence (calling her late to a meeting,
not inviting her to meetings at all, and failing to consutt with her).
84.
Defendant Godin isolated Peterson from team decision making and makes
arbitrary decisions that involve the children that Peterson services without
consutting with her.
85.
Plaintiff Peterson repeatedly complained to KLSD Human Resources person,
Scolt Persampieri. Nonetheless, Peterson's complaints were never
investigated by Defendant KLSD.
86.
KLSD, its agents and assigns have failed to investigate Peterson's reports of
abusive, hostile events whereby Jessica Godin and Defendant Hayes have
sabotaged her professional role, failed to communicate with her, denigrated
her good work, and thIealened her with hostile behavior. KLSDnegatively
Page 21 of 46
affected Plaintiff Peterson's ability to provide appropriate services to disabled
students.
87.
In addition, the harassing and retaliatory conduct prevented Peterson from
providing state and federally mandated services to students with IEP's and
504 Plans. Peterson repeatedly raised these concerns with KLSD because
its retaliatory behavior caused service disturbances for the children with
special needs. KLSD did nothing; thus, it is not in compliance with several
IEPs and 504 Plans.
88.
Most recently, on Wednesday, November 14, 2012, Jessica Godin went to
Peterson's office and hand delivered a letter to her. She did not knock before
entering and did not greet her. She pushed the office door open, shoved the
letter onto her desk in front of her, violated her workspace and disturbed what
Peterson was working on. She then turned around and exited.
89.
Jessica Godin's demeanor was volatile and hostile.
90.
Peterson read Defendant Godin's letter and headed to the Nurse's office to
gather the information requested by Defendant Godin.
91.
Peterson encountered Defendant Godin on her way to the Nurse's office.
Defendant Godin stepped physically in Peterson's way in a threatening and
hostile manner and demanded a written report without specifying the method
of delivery atthough she already possessed
92.
t~e
pertinent information.
Peterson continued on her way to the Nurse's office, gathered the necessary
information and returned to her office to complete the assignmentgivento
her by Defendant Godin.
Page 22 of 46
93.
Peterson then printed the statement and delivered it to Defendant Godin.
94.
Defendant Godin repeatedly stated in public that she has an open door policy
and that facutty and staff should feel free to walk into her office anytime.
95.
When Peterson delivered the letter to Defendant Godin, Godin's door was
open. Defendant Godin grabbed it, Peterson released it and Godin held it
firmly in her hands. She then screamed at Peterson that she had to deliver
the letter to Ms. Wmler. She continued to scream at Peterson. Her voice
was significantly elevated, screaming, hostile and abusive. Her tone was
threatening and angry.
96.
Peterson fett threatened by Defendant Godin's actions and screaming so she
left the office. The volatile nature of Defendant Godin's tone, her words, and
her posture were threatening, abusive, and unprofessional.
97.
Peterson was placed on administrative leave as a resutt of the encounter with
Defendant Godin on November 14, 2012. Defendant Godin continues to
work in her posnion as Principal.
98.
Upon information and belief, KLSD did not investigate Defendant Godin's
actions.
99.
Peterson remains reassigned to her home indefinitely.
100.
Recently, Defendants Kreutzer stated to union representative, Sandra
Grebinar that hewould "get Kristin Peterson". He also stated to Sandra
Grebinar that Plaintiff Peterson is "crazy" and referred to the report of Dr.
Reichman, which slates no such thing.
Page 23 of 46
-- -
---
--------
101.
--------------
As a result of Defendants' action, Plaintiff Peterson currently requires
counseling and therapy for her severe emotional distress.
FIRST COUNT - PRIMA FACIE TORT
102.
Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every allegation in the
preceding paragraphs of the within Complaint, with the same force and effect as
though each were more fully set forth at length herein, and further alleges as
follows.
103.
Defendants, their agents and assigns intended to inflict harm on Plaintiff
Peterson as explained above in the preceding paragraphs. In summary,
Defendants, their agents and assigns, intended to inflict harm on Plaintiff by
creating a hostile work environment that prevented her from completing her daily
tasks, discriminating against her due to her disability despite their knowledge of
her disability, engaging in a pattern and practice of discriminatory conduct that
created a hostile work environment, imposing disparate treatment on Plaintiff and
by causing Plaintiff severe emotional distress.
104.
As a resutt, Plaintiff suffered special damages. Plaintiff was forced to seek
therapy for her severe emotional distress, which resutted in Significant medical
bills.
105.
Defendants were not justified in their treatment of Plaintiff Peterson. Defendants
cannot provide any excuse for their treatment of Plaintiff Peterson as they were
aware of her disabilities for several years.
106.
Defendants' conduct would have been lawful had Peterson not been a person
with a disability and
~ad
they had a justification or excuse for their conduct.
Page24 of 46
107.
Defendants had no other motive for their conduct other than to injure the Plaintiff.
108.
By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff was and continues to be damaged as against
each of the Defendants for a sum in excess of all jurisdictional limits. Defendants
are jointly and severally liable in damages and other relief as set forth herein.
SECOND COUNT - INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
109.
follows.
110.
Defendants, their agents and assigns Intended to inflict emotional distress on
Plaintiff Peterson through their pattern and practice of hostile and discriminatory
conduct and disparate treatment, for which they had no justification or excuse,
that caused Plaintiff severe emotional harm. Defendants, their agents and
assigns, created a hostile work environment that prevented Plaintiff from
completing her daily tasks, discriminated against her due to her disability despite
their knowledge of her disability, engaged in a pattern and practice of
discriminatory conduct that created a hostile work environment and caused
Plaintiff severe emotional distress.
111.
Defendants' conduct was extreme and outrageous. Defendants' conduct is
considered to be extreme and outrageous because their conduct has been so
outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, that it goes beyond all
possible bounds of decency, is atrocious, and utterly intolerable. Plaintiff
Peterson is a woman ewer the age of forty with several disabiHties of which the
Page 25-of 46
Defendants is aware. Nonetheless, Defendants created a hostile work
environment for Plaintiff by preventing her from completing her tasks, treating her
in a threatening manner and treating her differently from other employees where
she was punished for engaging in the same conduct as other employees and
being disciplined for it while others were not. Principal Jessica Godin
continuously treats Plaintiff in a hostile manner, precludes her from performing
her job, invades Plaintiffs work space and approaches her in a threatening and
violent manner. Such conduct toward a person with a known disability is extreme
and outrageous.
112.
Defendants' actions caused Plaintiff severe emotional distress.
113.
THIRD COUNT - DEFAMATION
114.
though each were more fully set forth at length herein, and further allege as
follows.
115.
Defendants made defamatory statements about Plaintiff. Specifically,
Defendants accused Plaintiff of inappropriately treating a special needs child in
her charge. Plaintiff was accused of "manhandling" and "dragging" a special
needs child to the bathroom. In fact, Peterson had worked with this child for over
fIVe years and was aware that he feared automatic flushing toilets. Peterson
Page 26 of 46
carefully brought the child in question to the bathroom and demonstrated that the
toilet did not flush automatically. The child obseNed the demonstration and then
returned to his classroom unscathed.
116.
Plaintiff Peterson was labeled as a child abuser by KLSD and was removed from
her position because of this incident. Plaintiff was wrongfully accused and
defamed by Defendants.
117.
However, Defendants never communicated the incident of child abuse and never
reported it according to law to the local police. This indicates that the
Defendants' accusations of child abuse against Peterson were false and
defamatory.
118.
Defendants communicated their accusations that Peterson was a child abuser
and unfit to work with children to faculty and staff.
119.
Labeling Plaintiff Peterson as a child abuser is of public concern because
Peterson is a school district employee and she works with special needs children.
Disseminating these untruths about Plaintiff Peterson could cause her to be
blacklisted in her industry.
120.
Defendants' dissemination of the statement that Plaintiff Peterson is a child
abuser and unfit to work with children, with knowledge that this statement is
untrue, constitutes negligence in light of the consequences such a statement
could have.
121.
Defendant Kreutzer also called Plaintiff Peterson "crazy."
122.
He madelhis statement to Sandra Grebinar.
Page 27 of 46
------
123.
Defendant Kreutzer made the statement that Plaintiff Peterson is crazy to Sandra
Grebinar with knowledge that this statement is untrue because he was provided
with an evaluation by psychologist, Dr. Reichman. Dr. Reichman's report proves
that Plaintiff Peterson is not crazy.
124.
Plaintiff Peterson was placed on administrative leave due to Defendants'
statements. She was precluded from accessing the grounds of KLSD and was
prevented from perrorming her job.
125.
Peterson suffered severe emotional damage from Defendants' conduct toward
her.
126.
FOURTH COUNT - DEFAMATION PER SE
127.
Defendant Kreutzer called Plaintiff Peterson "crazy."
128.
He made this statement to union representative, Sandra Grebinar.
129.
A statement that Plaintiff Peterson, a social worker, is crazy, is defamatory on its
face.
130.
It was communicated in a fixed medium.
131.
Such a statement is so harmful on its face that Plaintiff Peterson need not prove
special damages because it indicates that Plaintiff Peterson is unfrt to pelform
her profeSSional duties.
Page2S of 46
- - - - - - - - - -
~--.
FIFTH COUNT - NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION
132.
though each were more fully set forth at length herein', and further allege as
follows.
133.
KLSD had a duty to train and supervise its employees in order to prevent other
employees from becoming subject to bullying, discrimination and violence.
134.
KLSD breached that duty by allowing Principal Jessica Godin to repeatedly and
continuously harass, intimidate, threaten and approach Plaintiff Peterson
violently.
135.
KLSD breached its duty by failing to prepare Defendant Hayes for her position.
136.
Defendant breached its duty by hiring Dr. Kreutzer and failing to train him on
preventing harassment and bullying of faculty and staff.
137. This breach of duty was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiffs being harmed
and damaged. Plaintiff was subjected to discrimination and violence, that had
Defendant administrators properly trained and supervised their employees would
have been prevented.
138.
KLSD failed in its duty to act as a reasonable and prudent employer would have
~
done under the same or similar circumstances.
139.
KLSD failed in its duty to adequately supervise Defendants Godin, Hayes and
Kreutzer.
140.
KLSD had prior knowledge and repeated notice of the bullying, harassment and
violence directed
at PlaintiffPeterson, thus Defendant Godin's, Defendant Hayes'
Page 29 of 46-
and Defendant Kreutzer's continuing acts should reasonably have been
anticipated.
141.
Plaintiffs injuries were foreseeable and proximately related to the absence of
adequate supervision on behalf of KLSD.
142.
are jointly and severally ~able in damages and other relief as set forth herein.
SIXTH COUNT - NEGLIGENT HIRING
143.
follows.
144.
KLSD had a duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring the Principal of the
Katonah Elementary School because said Principal would have significant
responsibility for children in her charge and for employees she would supervise.
Such a position requires Significant contact with the public. An unstable or
incompetent person in the position of elementary school principal poses a threat
of injury to the students at the elementary school and the employees whom she
supervises.
145.
KLSD was aware that Principal Jessica Godin exhibited a pattern and practice of
abusive, hostile, threatening and violent conduct toward Plaintiff Peterson. Such
conduct .caused severe emotiooaf distress to Plaintiff Peterson and prevented her
from performing her duties for the special needs children in her charge.
Page 30 of 46
--
- - - ----
146.
------
Nonetheless, KLSD kept Plaintiff Peterson in a position where Defendant Godin
would be her supervisor.
147.
It was foreseeable that if Plaintiff Peterson remained in her current position as a
social worker at Katonah Elementary School wnh Principal Godin as her
supervisor, Principal Godin would continue her constant abuse, threatening
conduct, discrimination and hostility toward Plaintiff Peterson.
148.
Defendant KLSD had a duty 10 investigate the complaints made by Plaintiff
Peterson regarding Principal Godin that was triggered when Peterson made
several complaints regarding Principal Godin's conduct.
149.
KLSD had a duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring the Superintendent of
Schools because said Superintendent would have significant responsibility for
children in his charge and for employees he would supervise. Such a position
requires significant contact with the public and faculty and staff. An unstable or
incompetent person in the position of Superintendent of Schools poses a threat
of injury to the students at KLSD and the employees whom he supervises.
150.
KLSD was aware that Defendant Kreutzer exhibited a pattem and practice of
abusive, hostile and threatening conduct toward Plaintiff Peterson. Such conduct
caused severe emotional distress to Plaintiff Peterson and prevented her from
performing her duties for the special needs children in her charge.
151.
Nonetheless, KLSD kept Plaintiff Peterson in a position where Defendant
Kreutzer would be her supervisor.
152.
It was foreseeable that if Plainliff Peterson remained in her current position as a
social worker at Katonah Elementary School wtth Defendant Kreutzer as her
Page 31 of 46_
supervisor, he would continue to cause her severe emotional distress and
prevent her from fulfilling her duties as a social worker.
153.
Defendant KLSD had a duty to investigate the complaints made by Plaintiff
Peterson regarding Superintendent Kreutzer that was triggered when Peterson
made several complaints regarding his conducL
154.
KLSD had a duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring the Director of Special
Education at KLSD because said Director would have significant responsibility for
children in her charge and for employees she would supervise. Such a position
requires significant contact with the public. An unstable or incompetent person in
the position of elementary school principal poses a threat of injury to the students
at the elementary school and the employees whom she supervises.
155.
KLSD was aware that Defendant Connie Hayes exhibited a pattern and practice
of incompetent, hostile conduct and disparate treatment toward Plaintiff
Peterson. Such conduct caused severe emotional distress to Plaintiff Peterson
and prevented her from performing her duties for the special needs children in
her charge.
156.
Nonetheless, KLSD kept Plaintiff Peterson in a position where Defendant Hayes
would be her supervisor.
157.
It was foreseeable that if Plaintiff Peterson remained in her current position as a
social worker at Katonah Elementary School w~h Defendant Hayes as her
supervisor, Defendant Hayes would continue to single out Plaintiff Peterson and
treat her differenllythan other faculty and staff who were similarly sihJaled.
Page 32 of 46
158.
Defendant KLSD had a duty to investigate the complaints made by Plaintiff
Peterson regarding Defendant Hayes that was triggered when Peterson made
several complaints regarding her conduct.
159.
Defendant KLSD failed to investigate Plaintiff Peterson's complaints.
160.
KLSD's negligent hiring was the proximate cause of Peterson's injuries.
161.
are jOintly and severally liable in damages and other relief as set forth herein.
SEVENTH COUNT - RETALIATION
162.
follows.
163.
Plaintiff Peterson made statements to KLSD, its agents and assigns regarding
abusive, threatening, hostile and violent conduct of Principal Jessica Godin
toward her. Peterson also had spoken out regarding providing appropriate
services for the students in her charge and confronted a KLSD attorney on the
issue.
164.
Plaintiff Peterson complained about the disparate treatment and hostile conduct
exhibited toward her by Defendants Hayes and Kreutzer as well as their inability
to execute their duties.
Page 33 of 46
165.
Peterson made statements regarding special needs children and her own
disabilities of which KLSD was aware and had made accommodations for in the
past.
166.
As a result of Peterson's statements regarding the above, KLSD, its agents and
assigns retaliated against her.
167.
In fact, Defendant Kreutzer specifically stated to Sandra Grebinar that he would.
"gef' Plaintiff Peterson and that she was "crazy."
168.
As a social worker, Plaintiff was uniquely situated to know the particular needs of
the children in her charge as well as information regarding certain events that
occurred between herself, Principal Jessica Godin and Defendant Hayes.
169.
Plaintiff in her capacity as social worker is most likely to be informed and have·
definite opinions on matters involving the education of students, and in this case,
disabled students as well as interactions wtth KLSD administrators.
170.
The students in Plaintiff Peterson's charge are members of a protected class,
special needs students.
171.
Peterson is a member of a protected class as a woman over the age of forty wtth
disabilities.
172.
Accordingly, Peterson was the only guardian of the rights and interests of the
special needs children in her charge, as well as her own rights as a person with a
disabiltty.
173.
The subject matter of Plaintiffs complaints to KLSD.are of public importance
because they concern the rights of special needs students and the rights of
employees with disabilities who are being discriminated against.
Page 34 of 46
174.
Plaintiffs speech may be fairly characterized as constituting speech on a matter
of public concern because her speech dealt with the issue of creating a safe
educational environment for the special needs children who attended Katonah
Elementary School as well as a work environment free from discrimination and
hostility due to gender or disability.
175.
As a result of her statements, Plaintiff was ultimately placed on administrative
leave in retaliation for making such statements.
176.
A causal connection exists between the protected speech and the adverse
employment action suffered because Defendants singled out Plaintiff for her
statements. Plaintiff was treated differently from other employees who acted in a
similar manner.
177.
Plaintiffs allegations support the inference that her protected speech played a
substantial part in the adverse action by Defendants.
178.
are jOintly and severally liable in damages and other relief as set forth herein.
EIGHTH COUNT - HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT PURSUANT TO NY LAW
179.
though each were more fully setforth at length herein, and further alleges as
follows.
180,
Under New Yark State law an employer is strictly Hable for acts by a senior
manager creating a hostile work-environment, because acquiescence in the
Page 35 of 46
------
harassment is imputed to the employer by virtue of the harasser's seniority.
Father Belle Community Center v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 221
A.D.2cf 44,54,642 N'y.S.2d 739, 747 (4th Dep't. 1996}("no logical reason why
the harassing conduct of a top manager cannot be imputed to the employer as
well").
181.
An employer is liable for the conduct of co-workers, supervisors and low level
managers which create a hostile work environment if the employer acquiesced in
the harassment, or condoned the harassment after the fact.
182.
Acquiescence can be shown by the same proof which is often used to show
negligence, in federal co-worker cases. Greene v. SI. Elizabeth's Hosp., 66
N.Y.2d 684, 687, 496 N.Y.S.2d 411 (1985)("An employer's calculated inaction in
response to discriminatory conduct").
183.
Defendant Hayes and Principal Jessica Godin are senior managers at KLSD.
184.
KLSD is strictly liable for their acts that created a hostile work environment.
Acquiescence in the harassment is imputed to the employer by virtue of their
seniority.
185.
Defendants Hayes failed to inform Peterson of meetings and other work-related
events that she should have been a part of and discriminated against Peterson
because of her disability. Defendants Hayes was aware of Peterson's disabilities
and the necessary accommodations, yet she reprimanded Peterson for wearing
clothing that would allow her to better regulate her body temperature and for
adjusting her .work time so that she did not have to drive at night.
Page 36 of 46
---------
186.
Principal Godin's conduct was downright abusive, threatening, hostile and
discriminatory. Principal Godin treated Peterson differently than other staff who
acted in a similar manner.
187.
For the above reasons, KLSD and the individually named Defendants are strictly
liable for the hostile work environment Plaintiff Peterson was forced to work in
due to the conduct of Defendant Hayes and Principal Godin.
188.
In the alternative, in the event that Defendant Hayes and Principal Hayes are not
considered senior managers, KLSD is liable for creating a hostile work
environment by its condonation of the actions of Defendant Hayes and Principal
Godin.
189.
KLSD failed to investigate Peterson's complaints, it failed to apologize to her as
the victim of harassment and discrimination, it failed to punish the harassers and
actually punished Peterson by placing her on administrative leave. Defendants'
actions show that it condoned the conduct of Defendant Hayes and Principal
Godin.
190.
Furthermore, upon information and belief, KLSD does not have an antiharassment policy. Absence of such a policy constitutes condonation of the
harassment.
191.
A causal connection exists between the hostile work environment created by
Defendants and theharm suffered by Plaintiff.
192.
Plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress as a result cl the hostile work
environment created by Defendants.
Pag-e 37 of 46
193.
NINTH COUNT - DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY PURSUANT T0 NEW
YORK EXECUTIVE LAW § 296, ET SEQ.
194.
Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation in the
follows.
195.
Peterson is in need of accommodations at work secondary to several medical
issues that affect her ability to function optimally at work without these
accommodations.
196.
In 1998, Peterson was diagnosed and treated for brain cancer and Hodgkin's
Disease. Peterson had an anaplastic astrocytoma, grade III and had a very poor
prognosis. She was left with several disabilities as a consequence of both the
illness and the treatment (surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.)
197.
Peterson has compromised equilibrium and impaired vision. She is visually
impaired in her right eye and has no peripheral vision. Additionally her body's
ability to regulate temperature is impaired, which can lead to dehydration and
severe heat exhaustion. It is both dangerous and difficult for Peterson to<lrive at
night secondary to her visual problems.
198.
Peterson is able to function very well by following numerous medical
recommendations.• Peterson continued to function well {!flul Defendant Hayes
Page~8
of 46
---------
and Defendant Kreutzer, the Superintendent, were hired during Summer 2011
summer.
199.
Defendants have taken issue with Peterson's accommodations and have
discriminated against her because of her disability. Peterson's treating doctor,
Dr. Mary Salke recommended the following accommodations, which have
worked in keeping Peterson
hea~hy
and stable for the past fourteen years:
a. Wear sneakers/athletic shoes to provide stability;
b. Drink fluidslwater throughout the day and must be allowed to have water during
meetings/conferences;
c. Wear loose fitting/comfortable clothing that allow Peterson to manage body
temperature (e.g. short pants);
d. Have movement breaks during long meetings;
e. Work between the hours of 7 AM and 4 PM because this is when Peterson is
best able to concentrate. Additionally, working during this time period allows
Peterson to drive to work during daylight hours.
200.
Because Dr. Kreutzer and Ms. Hayes had issues with Peterson's disability and
her requirements, they sought to remove Peterson from her position.
201.
As a result, Peterson suffered adverse employment actions at their hands.
Peterson was consigned to the District Office and then to her home and had a
damaging Holt letter placed in her file. Peterson was never given a hearing prior
to having a damaging Holt letter placed in her file. Peterson suffered retaliation
and discrimination at the hands of KLSD due to her disability.
Page 39 of 46
--- - - - - - - - - - - - -
202.
TENTH COUNT - DISCRIMINATION BASED ON GENDER PURSUANT TO NEW
YORK EXECUTIVE LAW § 296. ET SEQ.
203.
follows.
204.
Plaintiff Peterson is female.
205.
Plaintiff Peterson was discriminated against, in part, because she is female.
206.
Male employees in the same or similar circumstance were treated betler than
Peterson.
207.
Peterson was discriminated against and punished because she is female and
thus suffered harm.
208.
ELEVENTH COUNT - VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF'S CIVIL RIGHTS PURSUANT TO
NEW YORK LABOR LAW § 215
209.
Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and reaUeges each and every allegation in the
though each were more funy set forth at length herein, and further allege as
follows.
Page 40 of 46
210. NY. Labor Law § 215 bars an employer from firing, penalizing, or otherwise
discriminating or retaliating against an employee because the employee has
instituted a proceeding aUeging New York Labor Law violations, or because the
employee has otherwise exercised rights protected under the Labor Law. N.Y.
Labor Law § 215 authorizes a worker to sue an employer who retaliates against
him for bringing claims under the New York Labor Law.
211.
Peterson advocated for the righ1s of special needs children in her charge and
thus was discriminated against.
212.
Peterson filed an E.E.O.C. complaint against KLSD because of its discriminatory
conduct against her.
213.
For this reason, KLSD penalized and discriminated against Peterson in retaliation
for filing such a complaint. Peterson was subjected to a hostile work
environment and then placed on administrative leave from her position as a
social worker.
214.
TWELFTH COUNT - VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF'S CIVIL RIGHTS PURSUANT TO
NEW YORK LABOR LAW § 740
215.
preceding paragraphs ofthe within Complaint, with the same force and effect as
though each were more fully set forth allength herein, and further allege as
follows.
Page 41 of 46_
216.
New York Labor Law §740 proscribes, inter alia, an employer from instituting
retaliatory personnel action against an employee because the latter either
"discloses, or threatens to disclose to a supervisor or to a public body an activity,
policy or practice of the employer that is in violation of law, rule or regulation,
which violation creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the
public health, or safety.
217.
Peterson first advocated for the rights of a special needs chnd in her charge to
KLSD and its attorney.
218.
Failure to comply with a child's Individualized Education Program or 504 Plan is a
violation of law and can be harmful to the child in question.
219.
This issue presents a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety.
220.
For this reason, KLSD discriminated against Peterson.
221.
Peterson then disclosed violations of law including discrimination against her by
Defendant Hayes and Principal Godin.
222.
Such statements indicate that KLSD is violating its employee's civil rights, which
presents a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety when the
special needs children whom Peterson works with cannot receive appropriate
services because she has been precluded from completing her duties.
223.
For these reasons, KLSD is in violation of New York Labor Law §740.
224.
are jointly-and severally r",ble in damages and mher reUef as set forth herein.
P-age 42 of 46
THIRTEENTH COUNT - FREEDOM OF SPEECH FIRST AMENDMENT (42 U.S.C. §
1983 PURSUANT TO THE NY CONSTITUTION
225. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation in the
though each were more fuHy set forth at length herein, and further allege as
follows.
226.
By reason of the aforementioned retaliation against Plaintiff Peterson for
advocating for the rights of the special needs children in her charge and her
confrontation of KLSD's attorney, Emily Lucas, Defendants have deprived
Plaintiff of her right to engage in protected speech in a public forum in violation of
the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment as applied to the states and
their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
227.
Defendants' retaliation against Plaintiff Peterson for her speech is content- and
viewpoint-based in violation of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
228.
Defendants' retaliation against Peterson for her speech advocating for the rights
of the special needs children in her charge is unreasonable, arbitrary, and
capricious in violation of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
229.
As a direct and proximate resutt of Defendants' violation of the Free Speech
Clause of the First Amendment, Plaintiff has suffered irreparable harm, including
the' loss of their constitutional rights, entitling them to declaratory and injunctive
relietand nominal damages.
JURY DEMAND
111.
Plaintiffs' demand trial by jury.
Page 43 of 46
-------
--
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants, and each of them as
follows:
1. Declare that Defendants' actions and inactions, including Defendants'
perpetuation of the hostile work environment based on harassment and bullying within
KLSD, Defendants' discriminatory disciplinary practices and procedures, Defendants'
policies for investigating and disciplining employees, and Defendants' policy and
practice of ignoring or retaliating against employees who assert their rights, violate
rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution as
applied to the states and their political subdivisions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the
New York Constitution.
2. Declare that Defendants' actions and inactions, including Defendants'
perpetuation of a discriminatory work environment, violate rights guaranteed by the New
York Executive Law, New York Labor Law, the Civil Rights Law and the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
3. For an order of the Court for supervised employee training and anti-bullying
programs for all employees and students within the KLSD on a periodic basis at least
four times during each school year.
4. For an order of the Court for supervised oversight of the above-mentioned
training and programs to ensure that the training and programs are realistically and truly
implemented and enforced.
5. For an order of the Court for supervised oversight of the implementation of
programs aimed at preventing bullying, harassment, intimidation and discrimination.
Page 44 of 46-
6. For an order of the Court for supervised oversight of the seeking and
obtaining of federal grant monies for necessary programs aimed at preventing bullying,
harassment, intimidation and discrimination.
7. For an order of the Court for appropriate continuing training including crisis
intervention training and training that previously was denied to Peterson at
KLSD.
8. For compensatory damages sustained by Plaintiff against all Defendants,
jointly and severally, in an amount to be determined at trial.
9. For an order granting Plaintiff monetary damages for tuition and all fees, costs
and expenses, direct and indirect, for continuing private education.
10. For punitive and exemplary damages according to proof against all
Defendants, jOintly and severally, in an amount to be determined at trial.
11. For an award of prejudgment interest, costs, disbursements, attorney fees
and expert fees.
12. For injunctive relief in the form of an order requiring Defendants to preserve
all relevant documents, and an order preventing Defendants from discussing this action
with each other or their employees, agents, representatives, servants and assigns,
except with their respective counselor as otherwise necessary to comply with document
and discovery requests.
13.For an Order of the Court for expungement other personnel file.
14. For such other and further relief as the Court deems equitable or appropriate
under the circumstances.
Page 45 of 46
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kristin Peterson demands judgment against Defendants, in
an amount permitted by this jurisdiction plus interest, the costs, attorney fees and
disbursements of this action, and such other and further relief this court deems just and
proper.
Dated:
Katonah, NY
November 29,2012
LAW OFFICE OF PETER D. HOFFMAN, P.C.
By:
r!:J.~k;('lI!dAh.!
Giulia Frasca, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
200 Katonah Ave
Katonah, NY 10536
(914) 232-2242 phone
(914) 232-2245 facsimile
Page 46ef 46
VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
)
):ss:
)
Kristin Peterson being duly swom says that she is the Plaintiff in above entitled
proceeding and that foregoing Complaint is true to her own knowledge, except as to
matters herein staled to be alleged on information and belief and as to those matters
she believes is to be true.
Plaintiff
Kristin Peterson
On the 28" day of November 2012, before me the undersigned, personally
appeared, Kristin Peterson, personally known to me, or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence, to be the individual whose name is subscribed in the within
instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same in his capacity, and that by
his signature on the instrument the individual or the person on behalf of which the
individual acted, executed the instrument.
GrULlA FRASCA
Notary Public, Stale of New York
No. 02FR6200967
Qualified in Bronx County
Commission Expires February 9,2013
EXIDBIT "A"
-----~,-
KRISTIN M. PETERSON, LCSW-R
351-F Heritage Hills Drive
Somers, New York 10589
(914)-669-9518
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
- Katonah-LeWisboro School District Katonah, New York
1997-
Elementary and Middle School Social Worker (September 1997- present)
Responsibilities include: Child Study Team evaluations, Pupil Personnel j Committee on
Special Education assessments and intervention, collaboration with instructional
personnel. counseling, parent support, group work, case management for out-of-district
students and community liaison.
Julia Dyckman Andrus Memorial
Yonkers, New York
1991-1997
Program Director Day Treatment Services (July 1993-June 1997)
The Day Treatment Service is a multi-modality, psychiatric and Special Education
program servicing 45 latent and adolescent students. Responsibilities included:
maintenance of relationships with over thirty referring public school districts,
development of the annual fiscal budget, supervision of clinical
personne~
implementation of treatment strategies and behavior modification techniques,
collaboration with special education faculty and parents, provider of psychotherapy,
twenty-four hour administrative emergency coverage, public relations, statistical analysis,
research outcome measurements and utilization review.
Residential Treatment Center (1991-1993)
Primary therapist for 14 emotionally disturbed adolescent males. Provided individual,
family and group psychotherapy. Coordinated the multi-disciplinary treatment team.
Assessed each client's strengths and weaknesses then designed -individual treatment
plans. Recorded all infonnation used for diagnostic assessments, treatment strategies and
psychosocial referrals.
Jewish Child Care Association - Pleasantville, New York.
1989-1991
Pleasantville Diagnostic Center
Primary therapist for latent and adolescent boys and their families. Provided short-term
therapeutic -treatment and created diagnostic evaluations. Advocated clients~ needswithin the residential setting, Probation Department and New York City Child Welfare to
secure long term services. Collaborated with multi-disciplinary coIk:agues at academic
and clinical-conferences.
PeteJsonOOO125
Kristin M Peterson
ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE
.Fordham University - New Yark, New York
1997-2005
Graduate School of Social Work ,Adjunct Faculty
Provided instruction to graduate M.S.W, students at the Marymount satel1ite campus in
Tarrytown, New York, CoU(SOsinc\uded Social Welfare Policy and Child Welfare.
College of New Rochelle New Rochelle, New York
1993-2004
Social Wod< Department Adjunct Faculty
Created curriculum and provided instruction to undergraduate students in Social Welf<,U'e
Policy. Designed and implemented a unique course regarding the Treatment of Children
and Child Welfare, provided didactic and experientialleaming opportunities.
New York University - New York, New York
1994-1997
Ehrenkranz School of Social Work Adjunct Faculty
Field Work Instructor, supervising graduate M.s.w. interns. Completed Seminar in Field
Instruction at N.Y.U. in 1996.
EDUCATION:
New York University, Ehrenkranz School of Social Work
Ph.D. Candidate-
currently - ABD
M.S.W.-
1989 - Advanced Standing Student
College o(New Rochelle
B.S.W. LICENSE:
1988 - Dean's List Student
New Yod< State licensed C.S.W. (1989)
R039915 - License Number
State Education department - Pennanent Certification
790408971- Control Number
AFFILIATIONS:
Natiooal Association of Social Workers
National Association ofClinical Social Work Psychotherapists
PetetsOOOOO126
- - - --------
EXHIBIT "B"
FEB-24-2012
9142322245
05:02
P.070
KATONAH~BOROSCHOOLS
p.o. BOX 387
KATONAR.NEWYORJ:: 10$36-0387
. . .t_
(914) 163-1000
Il\X (914)W-705S
.,
0e1olJcr21.2011
Ms.KrisIa_
SO MdloagoI DriYo
Wbile Plains, NY 10603
Douloh."Y..... hesoby_ to.ttend
.[;;j;.g ... W...n:;;;"., 0c10.... 26.201l .. 1I:30un.j!iIfr.j
a........... Po...... Esq. ' - Smith, lJ.C and .... atlbc 1lisIrict000000c.otaaoCO
j
I
omp!O)DOi- ill Ibc Dmrid.
y"" ... _ I b c ~to briog AooociIIioa oqnotIII&Iioa to Ibc ......... If,.. ......... to
attend .... 1IIOdin& it will be __""-' an ... of .................. P..... call Sy Lyndo .. 91-4-76).7045
to...mn.you "iII .......... ..,...;.g.
Cc:
Dr. Paul KmII2!:r
M;ss Alicecroo..
.
i
i
i,
,I
i,
,
..
........ MiIJer- . y S<:boo~ 116 W _ Road, OoIdco,I!ridae. NY 10S26.1<JIIdia&,....
Ms. c...;. Hayes
Ms. Jessica Godin
Ms. Carobonc.........,
J4r.~Powea.Esq.
JtasooIicl File
,
·._1_ ._
EXHIBIT "C"
•
KATONAH-LEWISBORO SCHOOLS
CAROL ANN LEE
P.O. BOX 387
KAIDNAH. NEW YORK 10536-0387
(914)763-7000
FAX (914) 763-7055
www.klschools.o.:g
AmslallT Superintendem for ffimUUl Resources
Jan1laI)' 25, 2012
The J_ Ja~ SelrooIs
Ms. Kristin Peterson
50 McDougal Drive
White Plains, NY 10603
Dear Kristin:
As per our meeting today, Wednesday, Jan1laI)' 25, 2012, with Jessica Godin, Principal, Katonah
EiementaIy School and Sandy Grebinar, KLDTA President, this letter is to confinn that you are
to return to work in your assignment as Social Worker for Meadow Pooo Elementary School and
Katonah ElementaIy School on Thursday, Jan1laI)' 26, 2012. Please report to Meadow Pond
Elementary School on Thursday, January 26, 2012 to assmne your regular schedule.
Please be assured ilia! you will have ilie full support of your respective building principals, ilie
Office of Special Services and ilie Office of Human Resources, should you need any assistance
in your transition back to work. My best wishes to you for a successful school year.
Sincerely,
Carol Ann Lee
Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources
Cc: Jessica Godin
Carolann Castellano
Connie Hayes
Alice Cronin
File
Kalonah ElementoT), School
Meadmv Pond ElementOlJ' &hool
Lewisboro Elementary School
John Jay Aruidle School
Jncrease Mi/~~ool
John Joy High Schoel
•
EXHIBIT "D"
Begin forwarded message:
1. Resent-From: [email protected]
From: "Katie MONTILLI" <[email protected]>
Date; November 9, 2011 11:39:45 AM EST
Resent-To: jayIeiehsa@@aoLcom
To: "Beth Crossland" <[email protected]:>, "Barbara Ehrlich"
<[email protected], "Elizabeth Fisher" <[email protected]:>, "Elizabeth
Marcoux" <[email protected]>, "Elissa Rekow" <[email protected]&>,
"Heather Koles" <[email protected]:>, "Jeannie Paquette"
<[email protected], "Karen Basdekis" <[email protected]>, "Kristin
Peterson" <[email protected]"&>, "Kiri Ryan" <[email protected]&>, "Linda
Devine" <[email protected]>, "Lara Monasch" <[email protected]:>,
"Michael Weschler" <[email protected]'&>, "Patrick Chiappetta"
<[email protected]:>, "Patricia McGinn" <[email protected]:>,
"Patricia Rappaport" <[email protected]>, "Ray DiStephan"
<[email protected]:>, "Sean Murphy" <[email protected]:>, "Terrilynn
Wuensch" <[email protected]:>, "Wendy Bucaj" <[email protected]>,
"Gilbert Cass" <[email protected]>, "Monica Benniss"
<[email protected]>
Ce: "Cindy GREENBERG" <[email protected]>, "CONNIE
HAYES" <CHA [email protected]>
Subject: Crisis Intervention Training
Just a reminder that you are scheduled to attend the crisis refresher training on November
18 from 12:30 to 3:45. Please register with Cindy Greenberg on Leaming Plan as soon as
possible.
Tbankyou.
EXHIBIT "E"
- - _. . -
Continued Harassment of Kristin Peterson, by Jessica Godin
DATE:
6/4/2012
Location:
Library at KES
Jess Godin came to the faculty meeting a few moments late. She stood in front of the whole
faculty and she was crying. "I am going to cry. I came here to set up a new life. I am
divorced and a single parent All the decisions that were made as far as transfers and teacher
grade changes were made by the administrative team and are educationally sound"".
No one responded.
Jessica stopped crying and she reverted back to her typical voice and explained that she
wanted faculty to spread out in grade level groups and review the propnsed class lists.
Instructional staff broke out into groups. The specialists had no assignment. The
individuals with no assignment included:
Jeff Rainer
Christine Scaglione
Kristin Peterson
Carly Spaeth
Kristin Harding
-
Daniell. Cappelli
Janice Zygmont
Isabel DiMarco
Christine Eclder
Michael Gelfer
Chuck Scozzafava
Denise Friedly
- - ' - '--,--
These aforementioned staff may not know aD the students and there is no past practice that
they would participate in the design of class lists.
Faculty were walking about the library and Sandy Grebin.. had presented herself in the
doorway of the library and computer room. Many staff approached and spoke with Sandy
Grebinar. Here is a list - but it is not exhaustive:
Kim Buckley
jeff Rainer
Danielle Cappeli
Michael Gelfer
Carly Spaeth
Denise Friedly
Genieve Patterson
Enid Unden
Susan Hirsch
Kristin Peterson
Lorrie Egan
Chuck Scozzafava
jessica Godin approached me, only me (Kristin Peterson), and she asked me why I had
spoken with Sandy. I said 1 had already looked at the student lists. JeSSica Godin responded
by saying) "if you are going to speak with Sandy then you can leave the meeting'. I asked her
if sbe had told or intended on letting anyone else wbo had spoken to Sandy that they too
could leave the meeting.
I stayed present for the entire staff meeting. jessica Godin walked in and out of the Library a
few times. jessica Godin did not speak to any other staff person (who had spoken with
Sandy) to let them know that they could leave the meeting.
This is an additional example wbereby jessica Godin has singled me out and treated me
differently than my peers.
Kristin M. Peterson, LCSW
PetersonOOO61Q
EXHIBIT "F"
-
--
-- ------.--
.---
_.
-_.
-
"
•
Kristin M. Peterson
351 F Heritage Hills
Somers, NY 10589
[email protected]
linda Schluter
Director of Special Education
K-LSchools
April 10, 2011
Dear Linda,
I have been dOing a bit of thinking about the Social Worker role at
the K-L schools and the convergence of the fiscal crisis with the
desire for pro-active services and the need for mandated services.
Sadly, you will be leaving us but I was hoping to discuss these ideas
with you and perhaps you could relay them to our new director.
I have been here at K-L for 14 years. In that time, we have seen
numerous changes in leadership and few changes in the delivery of
services. Sometimes we need to think out of the box and try
something different.
For the 11-12 school year, I am proposing a change. Not that I was
asked, but that has never stopped me...•..
I am proposing that one full-time social worker assume the following
tasks across the district (K-12):
1. initiate and compile all initial Social History reports
a.' contact parents and review reason for referral
b. compile-Soclal History
c. explain the CSE process and their legal rigbts
---
".
d. provide outline data for the psychologist to better
understand testing requirements and the family's
concerns
e. report data to building social worker and/or psychologist
f. input data into the IEP draft
g. provide families with referrals for community support
services (reflective of their child's disability or problems)
and/or coordinate private practitioners with school
instructional staff and specialists
h. use judgment and discretion to determine which initial
CSE meetings to attend, attend complicated initial
meetings and or litigious meetings
2. compile all the triennial SOCial History updates
a. connect with parents
b. invite them in or conduct a phone interview
c. report data to building social worker and/or psychologist
d. input data into the IEP
3. become the case manager for all out of district students
a. understand their needs
b. communicate with families
c. visit students twice a year
d. attend formal planning meetings at the school venues or
via teleconference
e. attend CSE meetings when it appears that the district will
be initiating a search for an alternative setting
f. become the case manager when we are searching for an
out of district alternative
g. be the responsible party to navigate sending packets to
alternative school sites, to follow-up with personnel,
schedule visits, accompany the family and student on
visits, and to assist in managing and filing the STAC forms
It is my understanding that K-L currently has over 600 classified
students. Throughout an academic year of 185 days,the
aforementioned work-load appears manageable.
Pet"""""""07
'.
r believe this type of social work intervention would allow for:
- consistency in the structure of and presentation of reports
- all parents getting the same introduction to Special Services and the
opportunity to darify questions with a "point of entry" specialist
- the opportunity, from the start, for educational personnel to work
collaboratively with private practitioners and to refer families to
important community resources
- consistency with the entry of data into rEP Direct, hence the
creation of increasingly defensible rEPs by a specialist who
completely understands the expectations and nuances of the rEP
Direct system
- a significant reduction in the amount of service interruption, allow
for time in which the other social work clinicians could implement
pro-active, preventative services and unify the dissemination of
information with a K-12 system
How this Structure Could be Feasible:
- we could keep the same staff (6 full-time social workers)
without the need to hire additional staff, it would simply involve
re-allocating staff
This plan would seem reasonable and effectively allow for more
intensive intervention Without the additional responsibility of
paperwork and rEP management.
I have spent time elaborating on this proposal because I truly care
about the children and families here in Katonah-Lewisboro and I
think this plan would alleviate tremendous stress on our
practitioners. Every indostry expects to "do more with less", It
PetersonOOO7-08 -
"
"
seems reasonable to consider that with focused intent and fewer
diverse responsibilities the social workers could establisn more
preventative programs, be available to assist a larger number of
building students and the clinical service hours would be more
streamlined,
In clOSing, have it be known that if this structure were
implemented I would like to be the District-wide Social Worker, In
22 years of practice, I have grown a lot - but nothing has
prepared me better for this job than being a parent, And nothing
has taught me more about people than navigating this journey as
a 'visible family", as a family that exudes differences, and as a
family that embraces many challenges. In many ways, I can
relate to our parents and I have found that our parents take
comfort interfacing with a provider who has faced and embraced
our differences.
Thank you for reading this proposal and giving pause to the ideas.
Most Sincerely,
,..-(1,. ~ .._
1) .'{..:.r~
Kristin Peterson
cc A.Cronln
C.Lee
EXHIBIT ." Cir II
KRISTIN M. PETERSON, LCSW
50 McDougal Drive
North White Plains, NY 10601
914-227-4303
Paul Kreutzer
Katonah Lewisboro Schools
Route 138
Increase Miller School
Goldens Bridge, NY
Quaua~
JUl 11 2012
LAW OFFICE OF
PETER D. HOFFMAN
p.c.
July 8, 2012
Mr. Kreutzer, .
I am writing In response to your letter of July 6,2012. Your
letter is filled with distortions and confabulations; hence I want
to comment on your perceptual differences.
At no time did I yell, raise my voice or speak In an
aggressive manner. Right from the outset, you spoke over
me and derailed my communication.
- The Intervention in September had everything to do with
my transfer to a position that removed me from direct
contact with students. Therefore, a discussion about that
event and the ensuing months was perfectly valiel.
Especially, considering at no point over the last 10 months
have you communicated with me about the intervention or
my removal from contact with students and my
subsequent re-entry In January 2012.
- I was provided-a 20-mlnute window of time to discuss my
transfer. Since you and I have never communicated, I felt
it very Important to discuss my work history and the
accolades and accomplishments I have received and
achieved. You continually and repeatedly interrupted me.
Peterson000786
- I did not call Connie Hayes "incompetent" nor did I use
that word. I merely was stating the facts that I have an
inch thick record of emaits that document her routine
blunders, inability to communicate and breeches of
confidentiality. You introduced the ~rd "incompetent".
Perhaps it is you, who feels she is incompetent?
- My conduct was neither disruptive nor inappropriate. My
frustration grew when you interrupted me. If you had not
interrupted me our conversation could have progressed.
- I do not feel that Connie Hayes is "out to get me". Again,
that is your wording. I have never stated that. Connie
Hayes retaliated against me as.a result of the prior CSE
meeting held just before the start of school.
- I never accused you of Child Abuse. Again, this is your
distortion of fact. I am the one who was maliciously and
falsely accused of Child Abuse by Connie Hayes. I merely
was reflecting and asked you if you could understand the
pain of being falsely accused. Falsely accused of
anything. I never said Wisconsin. Your writing that I said
"oh that's right, I think you were accused of that in
Wisconsin" is a total confabulation. I never said that.
- I did not accuse you of Child Abuse nor made any
reference that you were accused of Child abuse. To have
you report that and contrive this allegation is
reprehensible.
- At no point was I "sobbing". Yes, I was teary and upset. I
am not a Child Abuser nor did I inappropriately intervene
with that student. This accusation has ripped at my soul.
You and Connie Hayes have perpetuated this falsehood
and slandered my character, and caused immeasurable
stress.
These 20 minutes were to discuss my transfer. The
reason I wanted the meeting was to discuss why I was
being removed from direct contact with students. Seems
that the intervention in September.had adirectbearing
and result on my being removedfrom student1XM1tact So
it was pertinent to discuss and review.
PetersonOO0787
- It was you who would not or could not tolerate the
discussion and you repeatedly, bullied me and tried to
silence me.
This letter (716112) is contrived, exaggerated and filled with misinformation. You continue to slander my good reputation and
abuse my character.
Your July 6, 2012,Ietter, is further evidence of your and the
district's campaign to discriminate against me, create a hostile
work environment and to take my job.
I demand that your July 6, 2012,Ietter, be removed from my
personnel file;
Please make certain that this letter is placed in my personnel
file.
ristin M. Peterson, LCSW
c.
Peter Hoffman
.Jamie MattIce
SandyGrebinar-
PetersonOO0788
Exhibit "H"
-0 I~-t·~·U '1..ft ~rn\1
-I
!I
I
AUG
L
50 McDougal Drive
914-227-4303
'~2012 t!J)
LAW Ut-t"k...i:....it'"
PETER 0_ HOFFMAN
Connie Hayes
Katonah lewisboro Schools
Route 138
Goldens Bridge, NY
August 1, 2012
Ms. Hayes,
I am in receipt of your email dated July 18, 2012. In this email
you state, "I would prefer at this point not to train additional
'trainers' until we have agreed upon how the TCI training can
be delivered".
This is far from a new problem. The scheduling problems that
exist now existed months ago when a group of my coleagues
attended the TCI training in Rhode Island. When my colleagues
returned, from the training in April, they debriefed with you
about the program and the logistical issues. Then again in June
there was emaH chatter about the problems that would prevent
the TCI training from being implemented during the half days
the last week of school.
It appears that you sent a group of colleagues to the training
and bad neither been pian-fuR nor responsive to the Inherent
scheduling glitches. This is a waste of vital and severely Um.'ted
PetersonOOO789
..J
~C_
resources and hinders the appropriate training that is needed
to serve students, especially children with special needs.
Since April, I was authorized to attend the August TCI training
in Ithaca, NY. I have been looking forward to the training. I
have made arrangements to attend the training and scheduled
personal trips around these August dates.
By not allowing me to go, this is one more example of hostile
retaliation and treating me differently than my peers.
This is further evidence of your and the district's campaign to
discriminate against me, create a hostile work environment and
to take my job.
SincerelY,
stin M. Peterson, LCSW
c.
Paul Kreutzer
Peter Hoffman
Jaime Mattice
Sandy Greblnar
PetersonOOO790
~---
Exhibit "I"
50 McDougal Drive
914-227-4303
Scott Persampieri
Route 138
Goldens Bridge, NY
August27,2012
Mr. Persampieri,
I am asking for clarification regarding my Teacher Assignment
for 2012-2013.
I am in receipt of one letter dated June 1, 2012 that tentatively
has me placed at John Jay High School and the assignment is
"Social Worker case Histories K_12D.
The letter you sent, dated August 1, 2012, has my finalized
teaching assignment located at MPESIKES and the assignment
is "Social Worker case Histories K-12D.
Can you please clarify my Teaching Assignmentfor 2012-20131
~
'n
r
e
Iy,
:re-r--
'n M. Peterson, LCSW
c.
Peter Hoffman
Paul Kreutzer
Sandy Grebinar
PetersonOOO797
EXHIBIT "J"
,
·i
;~
i :
SEP 07 2012
White Plains" New York 10603
(914)-227-4303
jayleighsage@ao].com
Sandra Grebinar
KLSDTA
Katonah, NY 10536
91512012
Dear Ms. Grebinar:
You and I have been in communication for several days regarding my schedule for 20122013. I have also had numerous email exchanges between: Scott Persampien; Jessica
Godin, Carolann Castellano, Connie Hayes, you and myself. In these emails, I have tried
to document why a split week schedule between Meadow Pond and Katonah ElementaIy
School is unreasonable and does not make any sense, The administration has negated my
request for a three day and two day schedule.
I have elaborated on these points:
KES has double the numbers ofIEP mandated counseling service sessions in
addition to 7 parent sessions (60 minutes long) each month
The schedule administration has proposed makes me physically unavailable for
the RTI meetings that are held in each building
Having a split day (Monday), in effect wastes an hour on the road. To get to the
car, drive over, park the car and settle in takes almost an hour.
My colleague, at 1M and LES, does not have this same schedule; hence I am
being singled out.
The proposed schedule conflicts with the Conunittee on Special Education
meeting dates
This schedule interferes with and prohibits me from doing the work I am expected
to accomplish, due to the deficit of time and the caseload requirements at KES
The parent sessions at KES were designed to guide the families through the SSI
application process that is cumbersome and time consuming, and the district has
been negligent with this initiative in the past.
Sandy, due to these points, I am asking that the Association fiJe a grievance on my
behaJf. The district is clearly undermining my work, they are interfering with best
practice. aod their schedule does not afford me the time to meet the IEP service needs for
the identified children and their parents.
PetersonOOO799
...
_ - - - -
EXHIBIT "K"
KRISTIN M. PETERSON,lCSW
50 t.t:Dougai Drive
914-227-4303
Scott Petsampieri
Katon~
Lewisboro Schools
Increase Miller
District Office
Route 138
o~ ~ ~ u-Wl-,'R)i
1 OCT'O 3 2012
/IWI
LAW OFFICE OF
PErEA D. HOFFMAN P.C.
Goldens Bridge, NY 10526
September 29,2012
Mr. Persampieri:
I am writing to provide afonnal response 10 Connie Hayes' email1iom yesterday
(9128112) that discussed ·professionalism".
May the record be set correcUy: No, I cfld not "hang-iJp' on Katie Montilli.
I will take a moment to describe what occurred. The back-story is significanUy
important
I have three recent emails from Katie MontiIIi. These emails are regarding
professional observations and evaluations. The lint email is dated (9125 at
11 :4OAM), Hwas sent to myself, Specia Education colleagues from Meadow Pond,
Special Education staIf 1iom Increase Miller, the bJr eIementlIy principals, and
Connie Hayes. This emaH says that Cindy Greenberg will be doing the Fa!
observation and the principal of the buDding will be doing the second observation.
Then there are steps of the directions to ~Iow.
The second IlfTISIl is dated (9127 at 3:36PM). This emailwassentto myseI[and
Special Education staff only at Katonah Elemenay School, the bJr elementary
principals and Connie Hayes. The bOOy of this email is-identical to the
first
Thetbinl emai wassentonly \0 me !lid it is daIed (9128 at 8:19AM). This email is
an apology for the confusion of gelling two tonIIicIing emaiIs.
Peterson000802
I called Katie soon after receiving the third email. I asked for clarification about
'wbich principal would be doing the Spring observation, since I was sbll scheduled the
same week as my colleague at Meadow Pond and Cildy would be conducting the
first observation. Katie responded, 'Jess Godin at Katonlti'. I said, "that is
interesting·.....(there was a pause), Katie aid not respond aid I said "thank you' and
hung up the phone.
I was breathless (when Katie said 'Jess Godin1- I was literally breathless, blindsided
and battered by yet one more hostie, retatalory, work related action orchestrated by
Connie Hayes. Just one more instance of Connie Hayes making mistakes, not being
organized and unable to communicate clearly. I am victimized (by Connie Hayes)
once again, just like that fateful day last September 2011.
I have several questions:
1. Why was there a ·mistake· made in the first place? It seems that Connie
Hayes makes repeated mistakes.
_
2. Did Connie Hayes give any attention to her pla1ning of Special Education
staff evaluations? And why are the dates, of a private malter, public
.HIformatio n.?
3. Why, if Connie Hayes aid plan evaluations. would she have Jess Godin be
observing me? (There seems to be little rational for this except to further
contribute to the hostile work environment and to iltimidate me).
4. It appears this 'mistake· was caught 48 hours after the first email was sent
and ironically the moming following my letter about Jess Godin's harassment.
The timing is interesting, don't you think?
Ms. Hayes' negligence, with this matter, is further evidence of ongoing reta6ation and
retribution that contributes to the hostile work environment
. Peterson, lCSW
PetefSOnOOOS03
EXHIBIT "L"
50 McDougal Drive
914-227-4303
Jessica Godin
Katonah elementary School
Huntsville Road
Katonah, NY 10536
September 21, 2012
Ms. Godin:
WIth this Ietter,l am documenting your repeated and continued
harassment. The events of today (9121112), once again, singled
me out and targeted me.
At 8:30 AM you sent me an email that directed me to attend a
meeting at KES on Monday 9/24. As you know, this Is my day to
be at Meadow Pond in the morning. Without any regard for my
schedule, without any regard for the children I service, and
without any regard for the parents I work with, yoU assumed
that I could drop everything to attend a meeting. It would have
been respectful to ask me or to Inquire about school related
commitments I may have alreadY scheduled at that time. This
meeting for student (OJ) is not an emergency. Instead of
communicating with me directly, as I have repeatedly asked
you to do, you sent a hostile email that undermines my
Important work with other parents and children.
What Is all the more absurd is that you had the wrong date in
youremail. The meetingfor(CJ) was schedu1edforTuesday.
And you were privy to this Infoulialion beceuse you have been
included on the emaiIs sentfromllr. Terry CostIn.
Peterson000804
It is noteworthy that Chris Ekler also is unable to attend the
meeting on Tuesday, 9125. Did you send her an email and
. <I4lmand that she report to KES? Did you also send an email to
Janet Duffy demanding that she abandon KES Uve and attend
the meeting? Clearly, from Mr. Costin's emails you knew that
these individuals were unable to attend because Chris is not at
KES at that time and Janet is busy with other responsibilities.
But rather than communicate with me, you sent a hostile email
that absolutely negated the importance of my responsibilities at
Meadow Pond, you singled me out and treated me differently
than my colleagues, and you denied any opportunity for
discussion whereby you would have learned that Jessica Nappi
and I had alreadY made a plan to communicate, I have alreadY
begun working with (CJ), and I have had several years of
experience working with Children who have his disability.
You are fully apprised of the concerns (about my schedule) that
I raised, before school even began. Your email seems to imply
that somehow I was skirting my responsibilities. But what is
especially distressing Is your knee jerk response that
dismisses my work with children and families. To assume that I
can drop everything (when it is far from an emergency), deny
the children with IEP's services, and cancel parent
appointments leaves me wondering If you have a resl
commitment to children and their families?
You were so quick to harass me that you even had the date
wrong.
Once again, I will . .iterate. that going forward please
~~ate with me directly.
Kristin M. Peterson
PetersollOO0805
EXHIBIT "M"
KRISTIN M. PETERSON, lCSW
50 McDougal Drive
914-227-4303
Jessica Godin
.
Katonah lewisboro Schools
. Katonah elementary School
Huntsville Road
Katonah, NY 10536
October11,2012
Ms. Godin:
I believe you are _II aware that I am the clinician attached to
Maria Mellon's special class and with this responsibility I am the
clinician who provides both IEP counseling services and IEP
parent training services for these children and families. Ukewise, Christine Scaglione is the clinician attached to Brian
Dillane's class. Ms. Scaglione and I meet formally on a weekly
basis to update each other, in addition _ have almost daily
communications.
It has been brought to my attention that you have asked
Christine Scaglione to "check in" and provide clinical services
to the students in Marla Mellon's special class. You have not
asked me to ·check in" or provide clinical services to the
students in Brian DiRane's class. Certainly, there win be days
when Ms. Scaglione is unavailable just as there are.days when I
am. unavailable.
Why have you implemented different arrangements? Whyam I
being treated adferently? Why didn'tyou comnnmfc:ate your
expectations4/rec~ to me?
PetersonOO0895-
Your arrangement (having Ms. Scaglione "check in" and not
requesting the same of me) effectively shuts me out, limits my
ability to advocate for children, impedes collegial problem
solving capabilities, and ultimately harms the children.
Your lack of communication with me undermines my ability to
serve children.
This conduct is further evidence of retaliation as a result of the
incidents at the beginning of the 2011-2012 school year.
k~
Kristin M. Peterson
0.
.
----............
Paul KNUtziIr
.,.... Huft'iIiWII
Peterson0Q0896
-
--
EXHIBIT "N"
- - - - - - - -
\--;'f
·
'~';
.
,'~;
:-.c..-""~ ~ i
'ii
OCT 22 2012
-I. U'
KRISTIN M. PETERSON, LCSW.R:,:~;-"~.:_
50 McDougal Drive
White Plains" New York 10603
(914}2274303
jayleighsa&@aotcom
Jessica Godin
Katonah Elementary School
Huotsville Road, NY 10538
October 21, 2012
Dear Ms. Godin,
I am writing to inform you that your letter dated October 19, 2012 is further evidence of
your retaliatory practices and it substantiates the existence of the hostile work
environment that you have created.
Ooce again, you failed to approach me and bave a conversation. As stated previously
you avoid communication at all cost, even when your lack. of communication impedes
effective help or interventions for children. In this case, you could have exerted
professional courtesy and encouraged the parent to speak with me directly about her
concerns. Instead you write me a memo that seems to imply that I have not provided
service to the particular student Perhaps if you had come and spoken with me the
situation could have been cleared up? But instead, you chose to write a memo that is
filled with distortions and inaccurate information.
In addition your date on the letter and the date you requested a response "'" the same.
But in the body of the letter you explain that I had until "the close of business tomorrow,
Friday, October 19""'. -so in addition to faetually inaccurate information you also
confused matters- with the inaceurate dales.
n is Itue that I bave seen this student 3 out of 6 weeks,
As stated, he is 1lOI.an RTI
student oora CSE student. The missed sessions bave been due.to bolidays. my1>eing
aDsent for a dep<>siti01l and attending CSE meetings at Meadow Yond. All "fwhich are
legitimate excuses.
PelersonOO08!)7
"
!
1believe you would give other colleagues some professional courtesy. Why are you
treating me differently than my peers? Why don't you communicate with me? Your lack
of conununication undermines my ability to serve children and build alliances with
parents. Your collusion with this parent negatively impacts my ability to create a rapport.
This conduct is further evidence of retaliation as a result of the ineidents at the beginning
of the 2011-2012 academic school year.
Most Sincerely,
c.
Paul Kreutzer
BOE
Scott Persampieri
Sandy Grebinar
Peter Hoffinan
PetersooOOO898
EXHIBIT "0"
---~---
.,.t;~ KATONAH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
::~.i·l(ft·~(1-06 Huntvillc Road. Katonah NY 10536
....1"
Pll"nl" ')1":1- -j,,- --Oil
Lv;: 'll-i-· -6
~- --:1')
.
Jessica Godin. Principal
Terry Costin, Assistant PriTlcipaf
Katnnah-ll:wishuro Schf\ol District
October 19, 2012
Dear Kristin:
Yesterday morning I was visited by a parent of one of the students to whom you are assigned to provide
services. The parent indicated that you were to have provided services to her son, Paul_, once a week
for one half hour. Other than the first week of school, the mother informed
me that you have not seen the
child since. The mother has reported some impact on the child as a result of her indication of your failure to
meet with the child. Indeed, I have reviewed the weekJy schedule you submitted to me on September 8 th, and
I find that it does indicate t~e provision of services to Paul from 11:15 to 11:45 on Wednesdays.
Please provide me with a response respecting Ms._daim that Paul has not received the scheduled
selVices from you by the dose of business tomorrow, Friday, October 19 th•
Please be advised that in the event I determine that Paul has not received the subject services, you are to
begin the same next week on Wednesday at the apPointed time.
Very truly yours,
Jessica Godin
Pelerson000900
----
TO:
Jess Godin
RE:
letter dated 10/19/2012
-----
Jess,
I in fact have seen Paul for three sessions. Keep in mind this student is neither RTt nor a classified
student. His mother had called and asked for some sodal skills mtervention to assist witb pervasive
anxiety she feels he experiences.
The dates:
9/12 - began service
9/19- out of building for deposition
9/26-
holiday
10/3- service
10/10- service
10/17- at MP forCSE
W~"-r-Kristin Peterson
PelersonOOO899
EXHIBIT "P"
From: Kristin Peterson <[email protected]>
To: Sandra Grebinar <[email protected]>;
[email protected] n <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 9:15 PM
Subject: Jess Godin - harassment
Jess Godin - harassment
Today 5/2/12, Jess Godin responded to an email that Christine
Scaglione wrote regarding the pre-school observations. Jess responded ¢nly to
Christine despite the email also including Sue Hirsch and myself. Christine
forwarded the emails to me and to Sue. The statement that I wrote has merit and
veracity.
Jess seems to engage in splitting and pitting people against
each other
At 3:15 there was an all call, Debbie Winter calling me to the
office. I go to the office and Debbie points to Jess' office. I walk in and Jess,
Mrs. Patterson and Terry Costin are there. Jess asks me about the schedule of the
pre-schoolers. I say she had volunteered to do them as also recalled by Sue and
Christine. I asked why Mrs. Patterson was there. Jess does not provide an answer.
Jess asked who was available to do the observations. I told her again she had
volunteered and it was not my place to schedule or assign my colleagues as I am
their peer. I asked why I was called in and not Christine when Christine sent the
original email. Jess said she likes to speak with people individually. I ask if
she intends on speaking to both Sue and Christine and she says she is. I ask again
why I was called first. She will not answer but to say again she like to speak
individually. Terry Costin has a good suggestion to go over the schedule at RTI
on Monday. That is a good idea. Again, Jess tries to draw me into making assignments.
I reiterate that it is not my place and everyone is busy. Mrs. Patterson tries
to settle the issue by acknowledging Mr. Costin's suggestion.
Harassment: why did she call me, walked into an ambush, why
was Mrs. Patterson there, Jess forgot her job that she said she would do, she
just needed to say n oops I forgot and move on, she only called in Christine and
not Sue, Christine told her the same thing as I did (that Jess said she would do
observations), Jess was happy to do the observations because she has a 14 month
old son and she is new to the area- and hence she could see lots of programs, Jess
did some visits and she tried to imply that I was setting up the visits, I did
not set up the ones she did do so why is she pointing the finger of blame, what
was the purpose of this ambush, she tried to set blame on me, was this a union
issue, was this a disciplinary conference, what was the purpose? When she said
she likes to speak with people individually, that was just a lie, she likes to
be efficient and to speak with people individually is not time efficient. Terry
Costin was not present when Jess met with Christine.
ft
Sent fram my iPhone
PetersonOO0910
·EXHIBIT "Q"
50 McDougal Drive
[email protected] .
914-227-4303
Scott Persampieri
District Office
PO Box 387
Katonah, New York 10536
November 15, 2012
Dear Mr. Persampleri:
With this letter, I want to officially document the fact that since
January 20121 have sent numerous letters to the Human
Resources Department. These numerous letters document the
chronic retaliation, harassment, avoidance tactics, and hostile
situation that Connie Hayes and Jess Godin have created. My
letters have been extremely specific and timely.
Jess Godin. in particular. since September 2012 has been
repeatedly hostile. she avoids communications with me, and
she has retaliated on numerous occasions. She routinely and
purposefuJly makes a point to circumvent my professional
influence {calUng me tate loa meeting. not lnvitingme to
meetings. and not consulting with me). she has Isolated me
PetersonOOO911
---.----
from team decision-making, and she makes arbitrary decisions
that involve the children that I service without consulting me.
This type of behavior is denigrating to my character and
.abusive. In addition, it is hurtful to our students and families. I
have sent you a significant number of letters documenting very
specific incidents.
I would like to call to your attention to the fact that neither Carol
Ann Lee (your predecessor) nor yourself has ever
"investigated" any of my numerous complaints. It seems that
you have been derelict in your duties.
In addition, on Friday 11/9/121 both called your office, spoke
with your secretary - told her it was urgent, and sent you an
email requesting a meeting with yourself and Sandy Grebinar.
You failed to get in contact with me. I might add that the email
was sent after your connection was restored.
I believe that the Katonah-Lewisboro School District is an
employer that subscribes to the beliefs and the Federal Laws
that protect employees from work place abuse, harassment,
and a hostile work environment In my case, the District has
been negligent and has not followed the letter of the law nor
followed our own district protocols to investigate such matters.
This district, and yourself, as the Director of Human Resources
have allowed me to be subjected to work place abuses for over
14 months. You have done nothing.
This untenable situation, created by Connie Hayes and Jess
Godin, has been allowed to fester and your office has failed to
investigate any of the numerous issues and complaints. You
have failed to investigate my reports of abusive, hostile events
whereby Jess Godin and Connie Hayes have sabotaged my
professional role, failed to communicate with me, denigrated
my good work, and threatened me with hostile behavior. In
addition. this harassing and retaliatory conduct prevents me
from providing state and federally mandated services to
students with IEP's and 504 Plans. t have repeatedly raised this
concern-that the district's retaliatory behavior()auses service
Peterson000912
disturbance, hence IEP's and 504 Plans that are out of
compliance.
Regarding Jess Godin's threatening behavior on Wednesday,
November 14, 2012-1 have attached a narrative to this letter.
You removed me from my position. It is disparate treatment to
have me removed from my job role and not have Jess Godin
removed from her job role while you "investigate" the
interaction. The disparate treatment is an act of retaliation and
an effort on behalf of the district to take my job. Given Jess
Godin's volatile unprofessional behavior, 1might suggest that
you insist that she have a psychiatric evaluation to assess If she
is stable, a danger or risk to others and up to the rigor of her
position.
~~Jb~ 26 1<---c.
Katonah-Lewisboro Board of Education
Paul Kreutzer
Sandy Grebinar
Peter Hoffman
PetersonOOO913
EXHIBIT "R"
~-----~-----~-
Interaction with Jessica Godin - 11/14/12
Jess Godin came to my office and hand delivered a response
Tetter to me. She did not knock and she did not greet me. She
pushed my office door open, shoved the letter onto my desk,
right into my view and she disturbed what I waS working on.
She did not say a word and she turned around and left She did
not hand me the letter appropriately or gently. She was highly
aggressive. She violated my workspace and her demeanor was
volatile and hostile.
I opened the letter and read the contents. Moments later, I was
headed to the nurse's office to gather any additional
information that was requested and Jess Godin was at the
landing of the steps right outside my door. Sh«: stepped
physically into my way and then backed up, I felt threatened by
her posture and wanted to go past her quickly. She spoke to
me and demanded, "J want the information in a written
report". I responded, "J think you already have the
information". She said again, "I want the information in a
written report". (At no time did she say how I should deliver
the written narrative). This request, in itself was a hostile act
as Jess Godin was fully apprised of the information she was
requesting as she had secured the facts last week on
Wednesday 11/7/12.
I went down the stairs ahead of her and went to the nurse's
office. J spoke briefly with the nurse, gathered the information
and returned to my office. I wrote the brief statement as Jess
Godin requested. I printed out the statement and went down
stairs to deliver the information to Jess Godin.
Jess Godin has repeatedly said, (in public}"! have an openll00r
policy. if the door is open come on inDo To date. she has not
PetersonOO0914
communicated with me any special directions as to "how" to
communicate with her and she had demanded the letter so I
was delivering it to her as requested. To treat me any
differently than her "open door policy" Is harassment
Jess Godin was in her office, behind her desk She did not stop
me from coming in. I handed her the report and she took it
firmly in her grasp. I released the letter and turned to leave.
She screamed at me, ''You need to give this to Mrs. Winter". I
did not approach her. She continued to scream at me several
times over, ''You need to take this and deliver it to Mrs.
Winter". Her voice was significantly elevated, screaming,
hostile and abusive. Her tone was threatening and angry. I felt
threatened by her tone and her physical presence, thrusting
the letter toward me and I was not at all comfortable to
approach her and take the letter back I told her, ·you have the
letter in your hand and you never gave me directions on how
to deliver the letter". I did not approach her to take the letter
back because I was frightened by her loss of voice control, her
loss of professionalism and her body language was aggressive
when she shoved the letter toward me. At no time did she tell
me to leave her office because she was screaming at me to take
the letter from her hand.
I turned and left her office. The volatile nature of her tone,her
words, and her posture was threatening, abusive, and
unprofessional .
.J;'bt'\....-r-~Ivy l~<--
!stin M. Peterson. LCSW
11/14/2012
Peterson000915
EXHmIT "'5 I.
NOV 20 2012
lAW OfFICE OF
PETER O. HOFFMAN
p.o.
KRISTIN M. PETERSON, lCSW
50 McDougal Drive
[email protected]
914-227-4303
Scott Persampieri
District Office
PO Box 387
November 20, 2012
Dear Mr. Persampieri:
Yesterday (11/19/12) at4:06PM,1 received a phone call to my
private cell phone number from Christine Scaglione (the school
psychologist at KES). She left a voice mail message of 30
seconds In length. ltis unclear, to me, why she would be .
caIHng me about work related matters when I have been
Administratively reassigned tobome?Ms. Scaglione told me
that "Jessica Gocfm -asked Christine to caltme anctthatJess
GodIn had cleared it with Scott Persampieri". Tbis ISJlotan
unusual communication pattern. Jess Godin has I"IIFeIy spoken
with me aU year. And when she did speak to me on Wednesday
Peterson000916
-
- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
(11114112) she was screaming at me. In fact, I have written to
you (numerous times) about Jess Godin's chronic avoidance
and her "fishing" for information from others rather than
speaking with me or communicating directly to me. It is
unfortunate that you have ignored all my complaints. This is yet
one more example of the hostile work environment, Jess
Godin's retaliation and Jess Godin's inability to lead or function
as principal. It Is also reflective of her lack of professionalism
and her behavior that interferes with or (In this instance)
impedes my ability to help coordinate services for those less
fortunate In our community.
I question "why" a colleague would be asked to call me about
school related business when I am not to have contact with
staff during this time of Administrative Reassignment? It also is
clear that there is a double standard. A colleague may call me
but I cannot call or have contact with a colleague. Again, this is
an example of the double standards In the district, an example
of me being singled out and treated differently than my peers,
an example of the retaliation that has been chronic since last
September 2011, and an example of the hostile work
environment created by and perpetuated by Jess Godin,
Connie Hayes, and Paul Kreutzer.
I was prepared to have the requested information by Friday,
November 16, 2012 and the PTA chair was pleased with that
date, the word used was "awesome". It afforded everyone
involved enough time to proceed as planned - given the fact
that we were aU struggling with miSSing 5 days of work; phones
and email being incapacitated; families without power, phones
or internet; language communication barriers; and a 2 hour
delay all thrown into the mix of the recent three weeks. I might
recommend that Jess Godin take responsibility for sabotaging
my ability to provide the Information they requested when she
fabricated the allegations and her chronic hostility impairs her
ability to communicate with me.
Mr. Persampieri, the letter you handdeUvered to me on
Wednesday, 11/14112 specificany says, -Duringthe pendency
PetersonOOO917
of this administrative reassignment, you will be relieved of your
professional responsibilities". So I am sorry, and it is with deep
regret, that I cannot give you the information requested. May I
remind you that I am relieved of my duties, I cannot work or
interface with colleagues, I cannot be on campus. and I cannot
provide you information that is only available at school. It was
Dr. Paul Kreutzer who established these parameters on
November 14, 2012.
~rrely,
~eterson
c.
. Katonah-Lewisboro Board of Education
Paul Kreutzer
Sandy Grebinar
Peter Hoffman
Pelerson000918
EXHIBIT', It
50 McDougal Drive
[email protected]
914-227-4303
Scott Persampieri
District Office
PO Box 387
November 27,2012
Dear Mr. Persampieri:
I am writing to ask for your permission to attend the Crisis
Training sessions that are scheduled for 11/29 and 1217. I have
been signed up for these sessions since they were made
available and it was my intent to attend. Will you allow me to
attend the scheduled training?
In the past, I have been denied training on two occasions: one
Jast fall (in the district) and then the August training {in Ithaca)
when Connie Hayes withdrew/rescinded my prior approval to
attend.
The district's conduct and purposeful exclusion from being
trained causes failure to provide the Federally and State
mandated services under IEP's for the students I serve.
The district's conduct and purposeful exclusion from being
trained is further evidence of the hostile work place
environment and retaliatory behavior I have endured.
I hope to hear from you today so that I can make arrangements.
Sincerely,
~
Kristin M. Peterson
c.
Katonah-Lewisboro Board of Education
Paul Kreutzer
Sandy Grebinar
Peter Hoffman

Exhibit - Lewisboro Ledger

Transcription

Similar documents

Read full story…

SPEC 501 Peterson, Libertyville

Where Silver Eagles Fly Hard and Fly Far! Eagles Bring Home

Rancho Santa Fe Review - Rw Peterson Investigative

Divorce Packet (Self Help)

Peterson Students Earn Their Wings

newsletter - Kingdom Speakers

for lease - Godin Property Brokers

peterson wpf - Peterson Portable Sawmills

RAY BECKERMAN, P.C.