It is a fight to level the playing field to be able to compete for jobs and careers on the basis of skills and make available apprentice training to all. In 1973 Al Percy launched a class action lawsuit to give workers like him a chance to better their lot in life. It would also ensure the availability of skilled workers to build the infrastructure of the future.
Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 66 Page of 154 66 of PageID 154 #: 322 commercial carrier, they paid the funds to operators, managers, and Parties-in-Interest of the enterprise, a racket to embezzle Plan assets that were paid to Employers by Medicaid, Medicare, private insurance and private pay, assets supposed to be dedicated by the Plan and Program to provide benefits. Intervention Pg. 14 Par 19. 456. Oriska Corporation, as the Plaintiff in Intervention, sought return of the million Risk Retention fund identified in the Nassau County Intervention Complaint, as Plan assets. Intervention Pg. 14 Par 20. 457. The Employers amended their complaint, removing the causes of action and facts setting forth fraud causing million to be diverted by the Defendant Philipson, replaced with a single cause of action for breach of a contract for money lent of ,000, pretending that the million causes of action do not exist, are gone, evaporated, the same as the security fund identified in the Complaint as the Risk Retention fund in Action in Nassau County Index 609877/2019. Intervention Pg. 15 Par 21. 458. It is obvious that the Owner Operator Defendants cannot be trusted to pursue and protect the million or any of the monies identified in this Complaint. Oriska Corporation has been permitted to intervene to prevent a miscarriage of justice by the Owner Operator Defendants by the attempted replacement of the million Risk Retention fund with ,000. Intervention Pg. 15 Par 22. 459. Nassau County Plaintiff in Intervention Oriska Corporation repeated and realleged the original Complaint in Nassau County under Index number 609877/2019 filed July 19, 2019, the original Complaint to recover million for the defalcation involving certain Owner Operator Defendants, by reproducing on page 100, paragraph 219 of the Amended Complaint and is likewise realleged here as if more fully set forth. Intervention Pg. 15 Par 23. 460. Rights of subrogation of Derivative Defendant Oriska Corporation arise out of common law rights of subrogation, exoneration and contribution, and Workers’ Compensation Law §§26, 26-a, 50 and 52, requiring that the Employers by law disgorge and forfeit funds that have been diverted and wrongfully converted, including but not limited to the security fund identified in the Nassau County Complaint removed to the EDNY in Action Nassau County Index 609877/2019, funds diverted from the Program established and maintained by the Employers for the purpose of providing benefits for its participants and/or their beneficiaries, by self-insurance or through the purchase of insurance covering health, disability, including training, safety, loss control, risk-management and workers' compensation under the Program. Intervention Pg. 39 Par 24, Pg. 100 Par 216. 461. The Plaintiffs in Nassau County Action Index number 609877/2019 are certain Employers of the Class. 462. The Carrier Defendant is identified at Intervention Pg. 53 Par 33. 66
Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 67 Page of 154 67 of PageID 154 #: 323 463. The Trust Defendant Rashbi Management, Inc. is the settlor and administrator of a trust for the Program as hereinafter identified at Intervention Pg. 53 Par 34. 464. The Employers, as Plan Sponsors, sponsored the benefit plan (the “Plan” or “Program”) for health, disability, apprenticeship and safety training, loss control, risk management and workers' compensation benefits which are the obligations of their Plan. Intervention Pg. 54 Par 35. 465. The Class Representatives of the Class Plaintiff are Donna Hodge, Annette Hall, Karen Grant Williams, and Alexi Arias, a Class of employees of Employers. The Class is a class of all employees of the Employers working for the Employers covered by the Program identified in this Complaint. The Employee Defendants in the 26 subrogation actions are a sub-class to the Class, being employees injured on the job while working for the Employers. Intervention Pg. 40 Par 28. 466. The Class are participants in the Program sponsored by the Employers, with their Plan providing benefits to Class members. Intervention Pg. 54 Par 36. In this Complaint the Class Plaintiff encompasses and replaces the individually named employees in Nassau County under Index number 609877/2019. Intervention Pg. 13 Par 17. 467. The real Parties-in-Interest are the employees, the Class, and the Rashbi Trust of the Trust Defendant, being persons damaged by the actions of the Owner Operator Defendants, and State Officer Defendants, in conspiring to and diverting, converting, and secreting Plan Funds, and they must respond in damages in amounts set forth herein. Intervention Pg. 139 Par 343. 468. That was followed by the New York Steak Office of the Attorney General Report on the handling of the COVID 19 pandemic, exposing the deficiencies of staff in qualifications, numbers and procedures to handle the COVID 19 pandemic, a pandemic which should not have been an unexpected event, but rather an event, like many disease events through history from which experience developed sterilization, quarantine etc to control spread of disease. 469. As a direct and proximate cause of breaches of the Owner Operator Defendants, the Party-in-Interest Defendants, and the Employers, the Class has suffered damages including, but not limited to, additional and ongoing life of claim costs for medical treatment and reimbursement of lost wages of employees of Employer Defendants which are unable to be reimbursed out of Plan assets which should have been in trust. Intervention Pg. 115 Par 260. 470. By reason of the acts of Employers alleged herein, the Class Defendants have suffered, are suffering and will continue to suffer damages and irreparable damage, unless said, Owner Operator Defendants and Party-in-Interest Defendants are restrained from these wrongful acts. Intervention Pg. 115 Par 261. 67
