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

Case

Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 6 Page of 154 6 of PageID 154 #: 262 CLASS REPRESENTATIVE ............................................................................................. 50 First Cause of Action against Defendant Government Agencies and State Officers for Injunctive Relief Prohibiting interference with the Alternative Employment Practice under 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 1985 in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983 .............. 50 Focusing on the current spread of infection that has occurred in nursing homes as it affects members of the Plaintiff Class employed in nursing homes, the root cause of this disaster begins with the failure of Governors Executive Order 45. We draw here from the following as evidence of the consequence: ................................................................................................. 51 Findings of the New York Attorney General in Report of January 30, 2021, Attachment #1 hereto ...................................................................................................................................... 51 Second Cause of Action against Owner Operator Defendants OF Identified Employers for Breach of ERISA Fiduciary Duties in the Diversion of Million in Plan Assets ............................................................................................................... 61 Million- Embezzlement Admitted in Court Documents ................................................ 63 Third Cause of Action against Party-in-Interest Defendants to Recover Plan Assets Diverted by Parties-in-Interest in Prohibited Transactions ................................ 76 Parties-in-Interest ................................................................................................................. 76 Fourth Cause of Action against Identified Owner Operator Defendants for Breach of ERISA Fiduciary Duties in the Diversion of million in Plan Assets ............. 77 Fifth Cause of Action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 invoking 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 1985 against the Party-in-Interest Defendants and Owner Operator Defendants in Complicity with State Officer Defendants Conspiring to deprive the Class of Rights and Privileges Denying Equal Protection of the Laws under the 14th Amendment .. 85 What Happened to the Monies Expensed in Cost Reports to Fund the ERISA Plan and Program? ............................................................................................................................... 86 Sixth Cause of Action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 invoking 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 1985 against the Party-in-Interest Defendants and Owner Operator Defendants conspiring with State Officers to Deprive the Class of Rights and Privileges Denying Equal Protection of the Laws under the 14th Amendment ............................................ 89 Damages for an illegal employment practice ........................................................................ 92 Seventh Cause of Action Against the Governor of the State of New York and the Defendant Government Agencies for failure of Governor’s Executive order 45 . 92 DEFENDANT GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK OFFERED A SETTLEMENT OF PERCY V. BRENNAN IN CASE 73-CV-04279 THAT IS UNENFORCEABLE AND FAILED ............................................................................................................................................... 96 Defendant Governor and his Agencies Actively Undermine the Percy Program .................. 97 6

Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 7 Page of 154 7 of PageID 154 #: 263 Eighth Cause of Action against Owner Operator and the Union Defendants for Illegal Employment Practices in Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 ................................ 98 ALTERNATIVE EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE The Percy Program, referenced herein (Document #6, Attachment 21 in EDNY Case No. 21-cv-01366) ........................ 99 The Advocates ........................................................................................................................ 99 The Percy Program Presented by the Advocates as an Alternative Employment Practice under 42 USC 2000 e-2(k)(1)(A)(ii) and (k)(1)(C) meets the burden of production and persuasion under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. .................................................................................. 99 The Percy Program is a Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice Available to these Employers and Presented it the Defendant US Department of Labor and the Executive Branch Office of the President of the United States ......................................103 The Percy Program Presented to the NYS Empire State Development Corporation is an Available Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice ..................... 104 The Percy Program Presented to the Port Authority of New York/New Jersey is an Available Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice .................................... 104 The Percy Program Presented to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority is an Available Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice .................................... 104 The Percy Program Presented to the New York Dormitory Authority is an Available Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice ............................................ 104 The Percy Program Presented to the School Construction Authority is an Available Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice ............................................. 105 The Percy Program Presented to the State University of New York is an Available Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice ............................................. 105 The Percy Program Presented to the City Of New York and its Agencies is an Available Less Discriminatory Alternative Method of Employment Practice ............................................. 105 Percy Class as Third-Party Beneficiaries of Contracts ......................................................... 105 Defendant Owner Operators have Violated and Continue to Violate 42 U.S.C. §2000e– 2(k)(1)(A)(ii) and 2(k)(1)(C) ................................................................................................. 107 Local 1199 of the National Health Care Workers' Union ...................................................... 111 Precedent and Jurisdiction to Enforce the Alternative Employment Practice .................... 112 Damages for an illegal employment practice ....................................................................... 113 Ninth Cause of Action under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for Damages under 42 U.S.C. §1981 and 1985 against State Officer Defendants Conspiring with Party-in-Interest Defendants to Violate 14th Amendment Equal Protection Constitutional Rights of the Class ........................................................................................................... 113 DFS State Actions under Color of Law in Support of the Scheme ....................................... 115 7