Polardo v. Adelberg

1

MICHAEL R. POLARDO, Plaintiff, v. JOEL ADELBERG, et al., Defendants.

No. 22-CV-2533 (KMK)

United States District Court, S.D. New York

March 28, 2023

Appearances:

Michael R. Poplardo

Brookfield, CT

Pro Se Plaintiff

Gerald S. Smith, Jr., Esq.

Valentina Lumaj, Esq.

Silverman & Associates

White Plains, NY

Counsel for Defendants Joel Adelberg, John Boucher, Colette Dow, Beth Staropoli, Alexander

White, Edward Reder, Michael Bauscher, Bill Canavan, Christopher Manno,

Howard M. Miller, Esq.

Michael P. Collins, Esq.

Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC

White Plains, NY

Counsel for Defendants Sara Richmond; Bond, Schoeneck, & King, PLLC;

Shari B. Fein

Garson & Jakub LLP

New York, NY

Counsel for Defendants Brian Gerety; Gary Silverstein; The Therapy Center, LLC

OPINION & ORDER

KENNETH M. KARAS, United States District Judge:

Pro se Plaintiff Michael Poplardo (“Plaintiff”) brings this Action against Joel Adelberg; Stacey Haynsworth; Christopher Manno; John Boucher; Collette Dow; Beth Staropoli; Alexander White; Edward Reder; Michael Bauscher; Bill Canavan; Richard Kass; Sara Richmond; Bond, Schoeneck, & King, PLLC; Brian Gerety; Gary Silverstein; Daniel Snow; and The Therapy Center, LLP (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”) and state law claims of medical malpractice, defamation, slander, libel, and intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”). (Am. Compl. (Dkt. No. 33).)^[1]Before the Court are Defendants' Motions To Dismiss (the “Motions”). (See Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 42); Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 46); Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 50).) For the following reasons, Defendants' Motions are granted in part and denied in part.

I. Background

A. Parties

Plaintiff is a teacher employed by the Bedford Central School District (“BCSD”), where, as of September 2019, he had been employed for 31 years. (Compl. 10.)^[2] Defendants Christopher Manno (“Manno”), Joel Adelberg (“Adelberg”), and Stacy Haynsworth (“Haynsworth;” collectively, the “Supervisory Defendants”) appear to have been Plaintiff's supervisors at BCSD. Manno served as BCSD's Superintendent from July 2016 to October 2019. (Compl. 12.) Adelberg is the current Superintendent of BCSD and replaced Manno in October 2019. (See Am. Compl. 3; Compl. 12.) Haynsworth is BCSD's Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources and served for a period as Plaintiff's “direct supervisor.” (See Am. Compl. 3; Compl. 10.) Haynsworth also serves as BCSD's “designated HIPAA officer.” (Pl's Opp'n to Supervisory Defs' Mot. To Dismiss (“Pl's Supervisory Defs Opp'n”) 24 (Dkt. No. 54).)

Defendants John Boucher, Colette Dow, Beth Staropoli, Alexander White, Edward Reder, Michael Bauscher, and Bill Canavan (collectively, the “BOE Defendants”) are Trustees of the BCSD Board of Education. (See Am. Compl. 3.)

Defendant Sarah Richmond (“Richmond”) is an attorney employed by Defendant Bond, Schoeneck, & King, PLLC (“BSK”) who served as counsel for BCSD. (Id. at 3, 14.)

Defendants Brian Gerety (“Gerety”) and Gary Silverstein (“Silverstein”) are co-founders, partners, and directors of Defendant The Therapy Center, LLC (“TTC,” collectively, the “Therapy Center Defendants”). (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff alleges that Gerety proposed a “prescription for therapy” for him at the direction of Haynsworth. (Id. at 9.)

B. Factual Background

1. Plaintiff's First Disciplinary Hearing

During 2018, Plaintiff showed one of his classes “a Documentary about the processes used to adjudicate claims of sexual harassment on college campuses.” (Compl. 11.) Manno

The Court cites to the ECF-stamped page number at the upper right-hand corner of all documents unless otherwise noted. “decided the lesson was inappropriate and . . . ask[ed] an arbitrator to suspend [Plaintiff] without pay for six months.” (Id. at 12.)

In December 2018, Plaintiff was informed he would be subject to a “one month suspension.” (Id. at 11.) The evening Plaintiff found out about the suspension, he

wrote an email to parents of students that were in [his] class at the time. In the email [he] explained that [he] would be out for one month as a punishment for teaching a lesson to graduating twelfth graders . . . about some of the []pitfalls[] of being a college student[,] . . . [including] the trouble [college students] can get in if [they] are either a victim of sexual assault or accused of sexual assault.

(Id. at 12) In this email, Plaintiff inadvertently included a link to the documentary he had shown to his class. (Id.)

2. Plaintiff's Second Disciplinary Hearing

After Plaintiff sent the email, Manno “placed [Plaintiff] on indefinite administrative leave and soon thereafter [Plaintiff] was served [a] second set of charges . . . demand[ing] [Plaintiff] be fired.” (Compl. at 12.) A disciplinary hearing was held pursuant to N.Y. Educ. Law 3020-a before Hearing Officer Melinda G. Gordon (“Gordon”). (Id. at 10.) After the hearing concluded, Gordon issued a written decision on September 3, 2019 that included the following statement:

[The] [p]enalty in [an] Education Law 3020-a proceeding is meant to be corrective, not punitive. The evidence has shown that [Plaintiff] is worthy of remediation and that a six month unpaid suspension, effective immediately, is an appropriate penalty. I leave it in [BCSD]'s discretion to order [Plaintiff] to obtain impulse control therapy, in addition to ordering a continuation of the therapy that [Plaintiff] is currently receiving, for a period of one year from the date of this decision, with all associated costs paid by [Plaintiff].

(Id.) Gordon also entered an award (the “Gordon Award”) that stated in part:

I find that a six-month unpaid suspension, effective immediately, is an appropriate penalty. Pursuant to [BCSD]'s discretion, [Plaintiff] is ordered to obtain impulse control therapy, in addition to the therapy that he is currently receiving, for at least one year from the date of this decision, with all associated costs paid by [Plaintiff].

(Id.) After the Gordon Award was entered, the BOE Defendants met in executive session on September 5, 2019 and, when the meeting concluded, entered the following resolution in their published minutes:

RESOLVED, that whereas on September 3, 2019, the Hearing Officer appointed under Section 3020-a of the Education Law in the Commissioner of Education's Disciplinary Proceeding Case Number 34,061 issued an order finding Tenured Teacher No.19/20-05 guilty of certain charges of misconduct and insubordination, and imposing a penalty of six months' suspension without pay plus one year of impulse control therapy at the teacher's expense, in addition to the therapy that teacher is already receiving, the Board hereby ratifies and implements that order, directs that the teacher be suspended without pay from September 6, 2019 through March 5, 2020, and directs the Superintendent to: (a) ensure that the appropriate payroll personnel withhold the teacher's compensation during that period and make whatever other adjustments to the teacher's compensation may be necessary to ensure that the teacher's compensation for the 2019-20 school year is 40% of what it otherwise would have been, and (b) identify a suitable impulse control therapy provider as soon as reasonably possible and direct the teacher to obtain such therapy from that provider.

(Id. at 9.)^[3]After the decision was entered, Haynsworth “assumed the role of [Plaintiff's] direct supervisor . . .[and] assigned [him] to work in the central office building instead of the high school[.]” (Id. at 10.) Plaintiff was “the only teacher assigned to work under the direction of . . . Haynsworth.” (Id.)^[4] On September 26, 2019, Haynsworth sent a letter to Plaintiff informing him of the BOE Defendants' September 5 decision and “provid[ing] some vague language about the impulse control therapy requirement [and] stating that more detailed information about the impulse control therapy requirement [would] be provided soon.” (Id.)

On or about November 12, 2019, Haynsworth and Adelberg decided to reach out to Gerety, a former BCSD employee. (Am. Compl. 9.) On or about November 15, 2019, Haynsworth consulted with Gerety to “set up a therapeutic regime [of] 42 [weekly] [i]mpulse [c]ontrol [therapy] sessions.” (Compl. at 10-11.) Plaintiff alleges that during these consultations, Gerety informed Haynsworth that “[TTC] does not recognize [i]mpulse [c]ontrol [t]herapy and . . . [that] ‘[i]mpulse [c]ontrol [t]herapy in and of itself isn't specifically a thing.'” (Am. Compl. 19.)

On November 19, 2019, Haynsworth sent Plaintiff a letter providing a “‘prescription' . . . detail[ing] the location, provider, frequency of sessions, length of sessions, number of sessions, duration of the treatment, and out of pocket costs,” and informing Plaintiff he must continue “‘the therapy [he had] testified at the hearing [he was] already engaged in.'” (Compl. at 11.) Haynsworth also warned Plaintiff that “‘[y]our failure to [comply] will be considered misconduct and could result in disciplinary proceedings against you.'” (Compl. at 11; Am. Compl. 9.) On November 23, Plaintiff emailed Haynsworth and Manno requesting that he “and a medical professional” be allowed to provide input on the impulse control therapy; Haynsworth denied this request. (Compl. 13.)

On December 9, 2019, Plaintiff attended “an [i]mpulse [c]ontrol therapy session with Mr. Snow.” (Id. at 12.)^[5]After the appointment, Plaintiff “informed [BCSD] in an email that [his] experience at [TTC] was miserable and in [his] judgment the professional conduct [he] was exposed to may be considered malpractice.” (Id. at 13.)^[6]

On December 13, 2019, Richard Kass (“Kass”), counsel for BCSD, sent...