Ahmad v. White Plains City Sch. Dist., 18-CV-3416 (KMK)

MUSHTAQ AHMAD, Plaintiff, v. WHITE PLAINS CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, et. al., Defendants.

18-CV-3416 (KMK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

July 16, 2019

OPINION & ORDER

Appearances:

Mushtaq Ahmad

New City, NY

Pro se Plaintiff

Gerald Stephen Smith, Jr., Esq.

Silverman and Associates

White Plains, NY

Counsel for White Plains Defendants

Michael James Del Piano, Esq.

New York State United Teachers Office of General Counsel

New York, NY

Counsel for Union Defendants

KENNETH M. KARAS, United States District Judge:

Pro se Plaintiff Mushtaq Ahmad ("Plaintiff") brings this Action against the White Plains Teachers Association ("WPTA"), the New York State United Teachers ("NYSUT"), Cairenn Broderick ("Broderick"), John Hughes ("Hughes"), and Carol Ann Tito ("Tito") (together, the "Union Defendants"), and the White Plains City School District ("WPCSD"), Howard W. Smith ("Smith"), Dr. Corey Reynolds ("Reynolds"), Ellen Doherty ("Doherty"), John Orcutt ("Orcutt"), Dr. Margaret Doty ("Doty"), Jeffrey Hirsch ("Hirsch"), Mark Wolstencroft ("Wolstencroft"), Vincent Dougherty ("Dougherty"), and Akiva Friedman ("Friedman") (together, the "White Plains Defendants") (collectively, "Defendants"), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ("ADEA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, and 1985; the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; the First Amendment; the New York State Human Rights Law ("NYSHRL"), N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 290 to 297; and the Westchester County Human Rights Law ("WCHRL"), along with common law claims, alleging that his employer, the White Plains City School District, discriminated against him based on his religion, race, color, nationality, and age. (Second Am. Compl. ("SAC") (Dkt. No. 31).) Before the Court is Defendants' Motions To Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (See Union Defs.' Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 42); White Plains Defs.' Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 43).) For the reasons to follow, the Union Defendants' Motion is granted, and the White Plains Defendants' Motion is granted in part and denied in part.

I. Background

A. Factual Background

The following facts are drawn from Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint and are assumed true for the purpose of deciding the instant Motion.

Plaintiff is a 60-year-old male; he is a naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Pakistan, and a practicing Muslim. (SAC ¶¶ 4, 22.) Defendant WPCSD hired Plaintiff as a "leave replacement chemistry teacher against a permanent vacancy" at White Plains High School ("WPHS"), which had opened due to the death of the prior chemistry teacher. (Id. ¶ 23.) Although Plaintiff was originally scheduled to begin his employment on September 13, 2016, Defendant Reynolds, who was the Assistant Superintendent of WPCSD, (id. ¶ 9), contacted Plaintiff on September 6, 2016 and asked him to start work the next morning, on September 7,2016, (id. ¶ 25). Plaintiff's students "performed great on the quarterly exams," and Plaintiff received praise "by his immediate supervisor" after she reviewed the students' exams. (Id. ¶ 27.) At some point, lab equipment was removed from Plaintiff's classroom; Plaintiff asserts "[u]pon information and belief" that this was done to "create hardship on Plaintiff and to make [him] fail due to unequal access to the lab equipment." (Id. ¶ 29.) Plaintiff asked Defendant Dougherty, a chemistry teacher at WPHS, (id. ¶ 18), about the lab equipment, and Dougherty told Plaintiff that "Mr. Braswell," an African-American chemistry teacher, stole it from Plaintiff's lab, (id. ¶ 30). However, a few days later when asked again, Dougherty said that Defendant Friedman, a Caucasian chemistry teacher, took the equipment. (Id. ¶¶ 30, 33.) Plaintiff alleges that Dougherty "numerous times made fun of Plaintiff's clothes, shoes, tie, sweaters, shirts, coats[,] and lab coat," and "called him a hotel waiter based on his facial features, race, skin color[,] and national origin," saying that "when he goes to [a] hotel he sees so many people from [the] Indian Subcontinent working as hotel waiters." (Id. ¶ 35.)

Separately, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Hirsch, a guidance counselor at WPHS, (id. ¶ 13), held numerous meetings with one of Plaintiff's students to discuss concerns the student had about Plaintiff, (id. ¶ 37). At some point, Hirsch, Plaintiff, the student, and Defendant Doty, the Coordinator of Science and Engineering at WPHS, (id. ¶ 12), met to discuss the student's concerns and her desire to "bring more students to Dr. Doty's office in support of her allegation against Plaintiff," and Dr. Doty "said to [the student] . . . that it will provide proof that you . . . are involved in organizing students' protests against Plaintiff." (Id. ¶ 39.) Plaintiff alleges that he informed Doty "that he was forced to ask for help in finding out who was behind" the student protests. (Id. ¶ 40.)

On an unspecified date, Defendant Wolstencroft, a fellow teacher and mentor assigned to Plaintiff by "WPCSD and/or WPTA," told Plaintiff, "we don't like colored people in the department," and disclosed that he was once the subject of an investigation because of charges of racism brought "against him and the whole school staff." (Id. ¶ 46.) The "whole school staff had to go through some type of training because of his actions," but no other disciplinary actions were taken against Wolstencroft. (Id.) Wolstencroft also told Plaintiff that he knew about Plaintiff's lawsuit against the East Ramapo Central School District and that he "knows everything about East Ramapo." (Id. ¶ 47.) Wolstencroft then said to Plaintiff, "you are a dumb ass; you did not do your homework." (Id. ¶ 48.)

One day, Wolstencroft told Plaintiff to paste WPCSD's "Discipline Guidelines" on each lab station in his classroom "and enforce them in their totality or get fired." (Id. ¶ 50.) In December 2016, Plaintiff complied with this directive, posting the Discipline Guidelines on each lab station and informing his students that the rules will be enforced. (Id. ¶ 51.) The Guidelines included a rule indicating that use of electronic devices is an infraction, and that "possible consequences" include confiscation of the electronic device. (Id. ¶ 58.) On December 20, 2016, two students sat next to each other in Plaintiff's class and sent text messages to others on their cell phones. (Id. ¶¶ 43, 53.) Plaintiff attempted to confiscate the students' phones pursuant to the Discipline Guidelines. (Id. ¶ 54.) One student complied, but the other put her phone in her bag, and told Plaintiff, "shut up and teach the class." (Id. ¶¶ 54-55.) Plaintiff attempted to retrieve the student's phone from her bag; when he did so, the student picked up her bag, and the bag's strap got tangled around Plaintiff's wrist. (Id. ¶ 56.) The student pulled on the bag, and Plaintiff "did not release" the strap right away in order to prevent the student from falling backwards in her chair. (Id. ¶¶ 56-57.)

The next day, Defendant Doherty, Principal of WPHS, (id. ¶ 10), told Plaintiff that he would be reassigned to the "science teachers work area," and that he was not allowed to interact with students. (Id. ¶ 61.) On December 22, 2016, Doty brought Plaintiff to "a small room inside the main office," and ordered him to sit in isolation "without providing any reason or explanation." (Id. ¶ 63.) The room was guarded by a police officer, who was directed "not to let Plaintiff go out of the room wherein he was detained against his will." (Id. ¶ 66.) Eventually, Defendant Broderick, President of WPTA, and Defendant Hughes, Chairperson of the WPTA Grievance Committee, arrived and "tried to force Plaintiff to sign a waiver" indicating he would not sue WPCSD. (Id. ¶ 67.) When Plaintiff refused to sign, Broderick and Hughes "demanded the school keys back from Plaintiff" and "told him that the Superintendent of school had told . . . Broderick the previous night that he was going to terminate Plaintiff," and that he would not be allowed to enter the school building. (Id. ¶ 68.) Broderick and Hughes then "paraded" Plaintiff, accompanied by a police officer, through the hallways in the presence of students and other school staff, forced him to remove his belongings from his classroom, and took his school keys. (Id. ¶ 69.) Plaintiff received a letter dated December 23, 2016 from Reynolds directing Plaintiff not to enter any WPCSD property without prior permission, and to refrain from contacting or communicating with any WPCSD employees. (Id. ¶ 74.)

At a meeting on January 18, 2017, which Broderick and Reynolds attended, Plaintiff fainted "due to the injuries caused or aggravated by the actions of the Defendants." (Id. ¶ 75.) Plaintiff alleges that "WPCSD and WPTA failed in transporting [him] to [a] nearby hospital." (Id. ¶ 76.)

On February 3, 2017, Defendant Smith, Superintendent of WPCSD, (id. ¶ 8), "reiterated . . . that he would recommend Plaintiff's termination," (id. ¶ 77). On February 13, 2017, Smithrecommended to the School Board that they should "retroactively convert Plaintiff's leave-replacement appointment to a probationary appointment," which the Board approved. (Id. ¶ 78.) Plaintiff was not allowed to return to work, and Smith again recommended Plaintiff for termination on February 17, 2017. (Id. ¶¶ 79-80.) Plaintiff was ultimately terminated on April 19, 2017. (Id. ¶ 81.) Plaintiff was replaced by "a very young female teacher of a different race." (Id. ¶ 84.)

Plaintiff alleges that WPTA and NYSUT "refused to file a requested grievance" on his behalf, and that he was effectively barred from going to the WPTA office because it is located on WPCSD property. (Id. ¶¶ 85-86.) Plaintiff also asserts that Reynolds promised to investigate Plaintiff's claims of discrimination, harassment, and hostile work environment, but that he has never "been provided a copy of the...