400 MAIN STREET CHATHAM NEW IERSEY 07923 4w org-i or GINA MENDOLA LONGARZO.LLC ?Aom'irran NY sans NOTICE OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 1. .Jersey City Police Department c/o Chief Robert Cowan 1 Journal Square Plaza 4th Floor Jersey City, NJ 07306 2. Chief Robert Cowan Jersey City Police Department 1 Journal Square Plaza I 4th Floor Jersey City, NJ 07306 3. Mayor Steven M. Fulop City Hall, Office of the Mayor 280 Grove Street Jersey City, New Jersey 07302 4. City of Jersey City c/o Mayor Steven M. Fulop City Hall, Of?ce of the Mayor 280 Grove Street Jersey City, New Jersey 07302 5. John Jane Does (Unknown Jersey City Employees) ?c/o City Hall, Office of the Mayor 280 Grove Street Jersey City, New Jersey 07302 T. 973.635.2901 F. 973.635.2904 GINA MENDOLA Lonoaazo. Esq; KARA A. MACKENZIE. FRANCESCA N. MENDOLA, Page 2 ofll I. Name and post office address of claimant(s)3 Erik and Suzanne Infantcs. -- Ill Post office address to which the person presenting claim desires notice to he sent: Gina Mandela Longarzo, Esq, Law Offices of Gina Mendola Lnngarzo, LLC 400 Main Street Chatham, New Jersey 07928 Data, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted: Claimant, Erik Infantes, has worked as a police officer for the Jersey City Police Department [hereinafter the and/or the "Department"l for almost thirteen years. Officer Infantes has a distinguished career with the Department, holding positions in the Street Crimes Unit and as a "plain clothes" officer in the Burglary Unitr In 2008, he was assigned to a position in the Special Investigations Unit and, until recently, had a spotless disciplinary record. Throughout his career, Officer Infantes has spoken out about issues affecting officers within the Department and has always lobbied for fair and transparent practices in the day-to'day activities of the Department, specifically including the manner in which off-duty details are assigned. During Ofiicer Infantes' tenure with the Department, he has never hidden his support of Mayor Jerramiah Healyl He openly contributed to his mayoral election campaign and in his personal time attended events and volunteered on election day, but he never let his support for one political candidate interfere with his responsibilities as a police officer. Conversely, Chief Robert Cowan has openly aligned himself with Jersey City's current Mayor, Steven M. Fulop, since he first ran for City Councilman in 2005 and has wielded his new found power as Chief to punish those who suppoited the "wrong' candidate, While rewarding those who supported his own candidate. Page 3 of 11 As far back as 2008, Officer Infantes was known to have exposed suspected misconduct by then Councilman Fulop. In April 2008, while Officer Infantes was on patrol with the North District Burglary Unit, he had reason to stop and converse with an individual who originally identi?ed himself as one name, but carried identification in another name. A search of the stated name revealed two outstanding warrants. The individual was placed under arrest and handcuffed. He immediately advised that he had lied about his first name (giving a third name), and admitted to his involvement in dealing in stolenlfraudulent credit cards. I A proper search of the suspect?s apartment revealed equipment used to illegally unlock gift cards and to make fake identi?cation cards. The individual then volunteered information about his involvement in voter fraud in Jersey City. He later explained that he was paid to make and use false identi?cation in order to vote for Steven Fulop in the 2005 Jersey City Council election and provided speci?c details concerning how and by whom he was paid. Of?cer Infantes then referred the information to the Hudson County Prosecutor?s Of?ce [hereinafter, the for further investigation. Interestingly, Officer Infantes later learned that the HCPO determined the information not to be credible for the purpose of investigating the voter fraud issue even though the information provided was veri?ed by Of?cer Infantes and led to further credit card fraud arrests. Moreover, the individual was quickly given a plea deal in exchange for his cooperation as a confidential informant for the HCPO. Upon information and belief, no further investigation was conducted into the allegations against Councilman Fulop but Councilman Fulop was aware that this suspect?s arrest by Of?cer Infantes led to an investigation based upon his complaint. Councilman Fulop served two consecutive terms on the Jersey City Council and in 2013, ran for Mayor of Jersey City. As part of his mayoral election campaign, Councilman Fulop released a television commercial in which he was depicted conversing with an individual out?tted in an official CPD uniform and badge. On or around February 27, 2013, then Police Chief Thomas Comey sanctioned SIU to attempt to ascertain the individual?s identity as he was not an of?cer of the CPD and the Department had not authorized the use of an official uniform - in the commercial. SIU Page 4 of 11 Commander Lt. Raymond Ortiz, showed Sgt. Musante and other SIU members the commercial. Of?cer Erik Infantes recognized the ?ctitious ?officer? as an employee of Major League Cuts, a barbershop in North Arlington which he had visited with his son the day before. Lt. Ortiz then. instructed SIU Detectives Brian Glasser and Victor Cherry to visit Major League Cuts in order to corroborate the information given by Of?cer Infantes. Upon arriving at 'Major League Cuts, the detectives questioned an employee who confirmed his appearance in the commercial with Councilman Fulop. He further stated that he was given the CPD uniform to wear during the commercial by a CPD Of?cer. He did not know the name of the officer, but he knew that he had a nickname and described him as an older, white male who was tall, balding and possibly high-ranking. Based on this description, the detectives requested a picture of then Deputy Chief Robert Cowan from SIU. 'Sgt. Anthony Musante forwarded a picture of Deputy Chief Cowan which was shown to the Major League Cuts employee. The employee immediately recognized Deputy Chief Cowan as the officer who gave him the uniform, but could not recall his full name. When the detectives mentioned the name ?Bubba,? he confirmed the use of that nickname during the commercial shoot. As soon as it became apparent that a member of the Department was involved, the information was immediately passed on to the CPD Internal Affairs Unit. It is unknown whether any investigation was pursued or completed. Deputy Chief Cowan was, however, made aware of investigation into his involvement in Mayor Fulop?s campaign commercial and the unauthorized use of an of?cial CPD uniform and badge. Councilman Fulop won'the mayoral election in May 2013. Not surprisingly, all officers involved in the investigation were transferred contemporaneously to Mayor Fulop?s' entry into office on July 1, 2013. Before Mayor-elect Fulop took of?ce, Capt. Joseph Connors was temporarily appointed as Acting Chief until Mayor-elect Fulop assumed his position and could officially appoint the next Chief. During that time, it was widely known throughout the Department that Deputy Chief Cowan Would be appointed as Chief as payment for his long-running support of Mayor Fulop, and Acting Chief Connors served merely as a temporary figurehead Page 5 of 11 and mouthpiece for soon-to-be-appointed Chief Cowan.l Indeed, Deputy Chief Cowan was almost permanently stationed in Acting Chief Connors? office and was obviously directing the day'tO'day activities within the Department. On or around June 28, 2013, Of?cer Infantes was advised by Lt. Carmine Lancellotti that he was being transferred out of his prestigious assignment in SIU and being sent back to patrol, stating that his transfer was ?political.? At the time, Of?cer Infantes and members of SIU had been - working with the FBI on a long-running, complex investigation. Because the investigation was still pending, the FBI held a meeting during the first week of July with Acting Chief Connors, Deputy Chief Cowan, Sgt. Musante and Lt. Ortiz, requesting a thirty day assurance of the Unit members? time in SIU. Deputy Chief Cowan personally agreed to the requested extension. As soon as the suspect was arrested in late July, Of?cer Infantes was transferred, even before the investigation was closed or the thirty day extension had expired. Officer Infantes recognized the underlying motivation for his transfer as a transparent attempt by Mayor Fulop and Chief Cowan to rid the SIU of those officers who had the audacity to investigate Mayor Fulop?s and Chief Cowan? possible misconduct during the 2013 campaign.2 The transferred SIU officers were replaced by less qualified officers who had never conducted investigations or performed?any of the daily tasks required of SIU officers. 1 Deputy Chief Robert Cowan was officially sworn-in as Chief on October 1, 2013. 2 Sgt. Musante, who was also transferred out of SIU as a result of his involvement in the investigation of the mayoral campaign commercial, was actually confronted by Chief Cowan in relation to his involvement on December 8, 2013. At approximately 3100 Chief Cowan summoned Sgt. Musante to meet him alone at Bayside Park, near a cemetery, in sub-freezing temperatures, in an obvious attempt at intimidation. Chief Cowan berated Sgt. Musante for his role in the investigation. He further expressed his displeasure with the fact that the investigation could have been sent to the HCPO Internal Affairs Prosecutor because giving a badge to non-officer is a crime and that he could have been indicted. Chief Cowan, motivated by an obvious intent to bypass Sgt. Musante for promotion to lieutenant, also suggested that he take a position in the Narcotics Unit, which he later failed to put him in. After Sgt. Musante decided to accept the position, in fear of further retaliation, Chief Cowan told him to think about who he wanted as members of his squad, and Specifically told him that he could have ?anyone but Erik Infantes.? I Page 6 of 11 Despite his recent retaliatory transfer, Of?cer Infantes was not swayed from voicing his frustration with the manner in which off-duty details were assigned. On August 28, 2013, Of?cer Infantes submitted a memorandum to Capt. Martinez, regarding ongoing issues with the selection of of?cers for off-duty details. Within his memorandum, Of?cer Infantes brought to light numerous issues with the current system of assigning off- duty. details, including: (1) the antiquated manner in which officers are ?randomly? selected for jobs which is highly susceptible to manipulation, favoritism and unfairness; (2) the complete lack of transparency in the assignment of off-duty details cloaking the inherent unfairness in the process; (3) the creation of safety concerns due to a failure to list all job details and the assigned officers; (4) the absence of any policy or procedure guiding the assignment of off-duty details, depriving the process of any uniformity between districts or pick-masters; (5) the extreme advantage given to pick-masters to set aside details for themselves; and (6) the inability of officers to grieve improper or unfair detail assignments. Of?cer Infantes 'al'so made the undercurrent of discrimination, harassment and retaliation based upon political af?liation abundantly clear. Indeed, he specifically stated that ?the payoffs for political donations are coming in the form of off duty work? and indicated that his own transfer was based upon political af?liation. Of?cer Infantes further reported that he was threatened by Fulop supporters with an Internal Affairs investigation for taking a picture of the off-duty pick list, which was in public view. Of?cer Infantes implored Capt. Martinez to investigate the corruption in the assignment of off-duty shifts, the benefits to those who supported the ?right? candidate, and the retaliation against those who supported the ?wrong? candidate. Capt. Martinez advised Officer Infantes that his memorandum ?went up the chain-ofcommandf? however, Of?cer Infantes was never notified that an investigation into his complaints was ever conduCted. Instead, Of?cer Infantes experienced increased harassment and retaliation. Officer Infantes came to be Viewed as a pariah within the Department by those in the favor of 'Mayor Fulop and Chief Cowan. Numerous articles pertaining to the political climate within Jersey City appeared on NJ .com drawing the attention of CPD officers, many of whom commented-on the articles. Posts by a particular individual with a screen-name of ?matthl? made multiple negative comments about Mayor Fulop and at times accused Page 7 of 11 him of misconduct. Several individuals obviously associated with the Department3 responded with scathing condemnations and even threats of physical violence, believing these comments to have been made by Of?cer Infantes. Of?cer Infantes did not post the comments for which he was blamed; however, the atmosphere of harassment and retaliation resulting from. his political af?liation fueled harassment targeted directly at him. Indeed, the responsive postings specifically identified Of?cer Infantes by known characteristics and traits, including the death of his brother in. the line of duty and a known involuntary tic that causes his eyes to twitch, when lambasting him for his perceived views and comments. Officer Infantes? work environment has become so hostile that he is being harassed and retaliated against for conduct and comments even when wrongly perceived to be made by him. I After his punitive transfer back to patrol, Officer Infantes was not given an opportunity to work ?plain clothes? assignments, which are preferred assignments in patrol, despite his prior experience. Instead, the assignments were given to other, less-senior officers. Officer Infantes? requests to North District Commander, Capt. Edgar Martinez, for ?plain clothes? assignments and referrals of actionable intelligence within the District were ignored. Frustrated with the lack of action in response to actionable intelligence he provided, Of?cer Infantes advised Capt. Martinez that if the Department would not address the issues, he would pass the information on to other agencies. In response, Capt. Martinez threatened Officer Infantes that he would be ?knocked over,? insinuating that he would receive disciplinary charges, if he did. Chief Cowan and those who did his bidding looked for any possible excuse to bring disciplinary charges against Officer Infantes. For example, in November 2013, a minor argument between Officer Infantes and another officer regarding the way a call was handled became elevated, involving shoving. Disciplinary charges were immediately issued to Officer Infantes, who received a written reprimand. However, other such instances have occurred within the Department which garnered neither disciplinary charges nor concern from the administration. 3 Comments made by these individuals Specifically reference happenings within the Department that would only be known by its employees. Page 3 of 11 After his transfer, in an attempt to further punish and demean Officer Infantes, his supervisors refused to allow him to use his expertise and do any investigative work on any suspect. Indeed, whenever Officer Infantes provided information that could assist in combating criminal activity, he was ignored and bullied. For example, during the week of December 1, 2013, Officer Infantes submitted a memorandum to Capt. Martinez advising of his receipt of information from a con?dential informant, which whom he had worked for a number of years, about two intended robberies. Officer Infantes? advice on how to handle the investigation based on his experience was ignored and, at the direction of Chief Cowan, he was bullied into turning over contact information for his confidential informant with whom he had spent years building a trusting relationship. Then, on December 6, 2013, Officer Infantes was advised that he was being sent for dispatch training on December 8, 2013. Officer Infantes appeared for training on'December 8, 2013 as instructed and was thereafter assigned, without explanation, to the radio room. Officer Infantes is new one of only three full-duty officers assigned to the radio room.4 All other employees are either civilians or officers on light or modified duty who. are unable to carry a weapon. Officer Infantes has thus been constructively demoted and given increasingly diminished and trivial job duties twice as a result of his involvement in the investigation into Mayor Fulop and Chief Cowan and because of his political affiliation. In fact, Training Coordinator Victor Cook actually told Officer Infantes, ?you?ll be here for the next three and a half years,? which, coincidentally, is the length of Mayor Fulop?s term in office. It should be noted that four other CPD officers experienced similar harassment by Mayor Fulop and Chief Cowan after issuing traffic summonses to a woman who aligned herself with the Fulop administration. Like Officer Infantes, the four investigating officers were transferred to less 4 The other full-duty officers consist of one officer who was assigned to the radio room as an alternative to retirement after he voiced his intent to retire following a shooting incident and another who was only recently returned to full-duty after serving multiple years on modi?ed duty resulting from a disciplinary matter. Page 9 of11 prestigious posts almost immediately after making waves for someone connected to Mayor Fulop.5 Most recently, in an act of further retaliation for his involvement in the investigation of the mayoral campaign commercial and his valid complaints of misconduct and harassment, Of?cer Infantes received in?ated disciplinary charges. On February 18, 2014, Officer Infantes was served with a Notice of Minor Disciplinary Action (inexplicably dated January 31, 2014) resulting from an incident which occurred in August 2013. . Officer lnfantes was never served with a notification that he was a target of an Internal Affairs investigation, was never interviewed and yet was served with charges six months after the incident occurred. These procedurally deficient charges are an obvious attempt to find any reason possible to charge Officer lnfantes, no matter how much time has passed, and ravage his previously stellar personnel record. As a result of the continued harassment and retaliation, Officer lnfantes has experienced damage to his reputation and personnel record which will continue to affect his employability and future I promotions. Of?cer Infantes has also experienced increased stress and anxiety which have led to difficultly sleeping and a disruption of his family life. Claimant is a public employee and suffered retaliation and a hostile work environment resulting in two unwarranted constructive demotions in the form of a transfer and a reassignment as well as unwarranted retaliatory disciplinary charges and loss of overtime assignments. The Department and the City have failed to take any real or proper corrective action, despite being put on notice of the improper misconduct and have instead responded with efforts to harass, retaliate against and punish him because of his political af?liation and for voicing valid concerns and for engaging in protected speech activities. 5 The four of?cers filed a federal lawsuit against the City and Chief Cowan on January 10, 2014; Page 10 of 11 IV. General Description of the injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be know at the time of presentation of this claim: The course of conduct of the Department, the City and all the individuals named above violated the Department?s own written policies which contain a non'retaliation provision and has caused Claimant to suffer damages. Furthermore, the aforesaid unlawful conduct has resulted in intentional retaliation and harassment; civil rights Violations; intentional in?iction of emotional distress; severe emotional upset; loss of reputation; loss of income; constitutional rights violations; 42 USC ?1983 Violations; Violations of the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act; Violations of the New Jersey Civil Rights Act; statutory Violations; loss of consortium; and conspiracy. V. The name or names of other public entity, employee, or employees causing the injury, damage or loss, if known: 1. I State of New Jersey, Dept. of Labor John Fitch Plaza PO. Box 110 Trenton, NJ 08625 2. State of New Jersey, Dept. of Labor Labor Standards Safety Enforcement (formerly Workplace Standards) 225 E. State Street P.O. Box 054 Trenton, NJ 08625 Page 11 of 11 VI. The amount claimed as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of the computation of the amount claimed? The amount claimed is $2,500,000.00 dollars. However, the extent of the injuries is ongoing and will continue to be revealed and ascertained through continuing discovery. Upon the completion of discovery, a proper presentation of the claim can be further ascertained. If there are any supplemental ferms to answer, please provide a copy of said forms to my of?ce immediately. LAW OFFICES OF GINA MENDOLA LONGARZO, LLC ass/$5 LONGARZO, ESQ. Attorneys for Claimant I Dated: March 3, 2014 Erik Infantes 400 MAIN STREET CHATHAM NEW JERSEY 07923 AW GINA LLC NY BARS NOTICE OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES T03 1. Jersey City Police. Department c/o Chief Robert Cowan 1 Journal Square Plaza 4th Floor I Jersey City, NJ 07306 2. Chief Robert Cowan Jersey City Police Department 1 Journal Square Plaza 4th Floor Jersey City, NJ 07306 3. Mayor Steven M. Fulop City Hall, O??ce of the Mayor 280 Grove Street Jersey City, New Jersey 07302 i 4. City of Jersey City c/o Mayor Steven M. Fulop City Hall, Office of the Mayor 280 Grove Street Jersey City, New Jersey 07302 5. John Jane Does (Unknown Jersey City Employees) c/o City Hall, Of?ce of the Mayor 280 Grove Street Jersey City, New Jersey 07302 T. 973.635.2901 F. 973.635.2904 GINA MENDOLA LONGARZO. KARA A. MACKENZIE. Esq,l FRANCESCA N. Page 2 an I. Name and post office address ofclairnant(s>1 11. Post office address to which the person presenting claim desires notice to be sent: Gina Mendola Longarzo, Esq. Law Offices of Gina Mendola Longarzo, LLC 400 Main Street Chatham, New Jersey 07928 111. Date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted: Claimant, Anthony Musante, has Worked as a police officer for the Jersey City Police Department [hereinafter the and/or the "Department"l for over nineteen years and has been serving as a sergeant since 2005. Sgt. Musante has a distinguished career with the Department, holding positions with the Hudson County Prosecutor's Office Lhereinafter, the Narcotics Task Force and the CPD Internal Affairs Unit and receiving numerous commendations and awards from tho HCPO, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms [huroinaften the the Fraternal Order of Police lhereinafter, the and the Police Officer Benevolent Association Diereinafter, the as well as an Honorable Mention Valor Award in 2005, the Department's highest honor. In 2006, he was assigned to a position as a supervisor in the Special Investigations Unit Dicreinafter, the conducting complex and protracted investigations involving organiwed crime, corruption and terrorism in cooperation with federal, state and local law enforcement, Until recently, Sgt, Musante had a spotless disciplinary record. During Sgt. Musante's tenure with the Department, he has never hidden his support of Mayor Jcn'amiah Hcaly. He openly contributed to his mayoral election campaign and in his personal time attended events, but never let his support for one political candidate interfere with his responsibilities as a police officers Conversely, Chief Robert Cowan has openly aligned himself with Jersey City's current Mayor, Steven M. Fnlop, 2 I Page 3 of 8 since he first ran for City Councilman in 2005 and has wielded his new found power as Chief to punish those who supported the ?wrong? candidate, while rewarding those who supported his own candidate. Councilman Fulop served two consecutive terms on the Jersey City Council and in 2013, ran for Mayor of Jersey City. As part of his mayoral election campaign, Councilman Fulop released a television commercial in which he was depicted conversing with an individual out?tted in an official JCPD uniform and badge. On or around February 27, 2013, then Police Chief Thomas Comey sanctioned SIU to attempt to ascertain the individual?s identity as he was not an officer of the CPD and the Department had not authorized the use of an official uniform in the commercial. SIU Commander Lt. Raymond Ortiz, showed Sgt. Musante and other SIU members the commercial. Officer Erik Infantes recognized the fictitious ?officer? as an employee of Major League Cuts, a barbershop in North Arlington which he had visited with his son the day before. Lt. Ortiz then instructed SIU Detectives Brian Glasser and Victor Cherry to visit Major League Cuts in order to corroborate the information given by Officer Infantes. Upon arriving at Major League Cuts, the detectives questioned an employee who confirmed his appearance in the commercial with Councilman Fulop. He further stated that he was given the CPD uniform to wear during the commercial by a CPD officer. He did not know the name of the officer, but knew that he had a nickname and described him as an older, white male who was tall, balding and possibly high-ranking. Based on this description, the detectives requested a picture of then Deputy Chief Robert Cowan from SIU. In response, Sgt. Musante forwarded a picture of Deputy Chief Cowan which was shown to the Major League Cuts employee. The employee immediately recognized Deputy Chief Cowan as the officer who gave him the uniform, but could not recall his full name. When the detectives mentioned the name ?Bubba,? he confirmed. the use of that nickname during the commercial shoot. As soon as it became apparent that a member of the Department was involved, the information was immediately passed on to the CPD Internal Affairs Unit. It is unknown whether any investigation was pursued or completed. Deputy Chief Cowan was, however, made aware of investigation into his involvement in Mayor Fulop?s campaign commercial Page 4 of 8 and the unauthorized use of an of?cial CPD uniform and badge. Councilman Fulop won the mayoral election in, May 2013. Not surprisingly, all SIU of?cers involved in the investigation were transferred contemporaneously to Mayor Fulop?s entry into office on July 1, 2013. Before Mayor-elect Fulop took of?ce, Capt. Joseph Connors 'was temporarily appointed as Acting Chief until Mayor-elect Fulop assumed his position and could officially appoint the next Chief. During that time, it was widely known throughout the Department that Deputy Chief Cowan would be appointed as Chief as payment for his long-running support of Mayor Fulop and Acting Chief Connors served merely as a temporary ?gurehead and mouthpiece for soon'tO'be-appointed Chief Cowan.1 Indeed, Deputy Chief Cowan was almost permanently stationed in Acting Chief Connors? Office and was obviously directing the day-to-day activities within the Department. On or around June 28, 2013, Sgt. Musante was made aware by Chief Acting Chief Connors that transfers in SIU were imminent. At the time, Sgt. Musante and members of SIU had been working with the FBI on a long- running, complex investigation. Because the investigation was still pending, the FBI held a meeting during the first week of July with Acting Chief Connors, Deputy Chief Cowan, Sgt. Musante and Lt. Ortiz, requesting a thirty day assurance of the Unit members? time in SIU. Deputy Chief Cowan personally agreed to the requested extension. On August 8, 2013, after the expiration of the extension, Sgt. Musante was inexplicably transferred out of his prestigious assignment in SIU and sent back to patrol, to the highly undesirable midnight shift and has been working the midnight shift-ever since. Sgt. Musante recognized the underlying motivation for his transfer as a transparent attempt by Mayor Fulop and Chief Cowan to rid the SIU of those of?cers who had the audacity to investigate Mayor Fulop?s and Chief Cowan? possible misconduct during the 2013 campaign. The transferred SIU officers were replaced by less quali?ed of?cers who had never conducted investigations or performed any of the daily tasks required of SIU officers. Deputy Chief Robert Cowan was of?cially sworn-in as Chief on October 1, 2013. Page of 8 Not long after Chief Cowan officially assumed the position of Chief in October 2013, he confronted Sgt._Musante about his involvement in the? investigation of the mayoral campaign commercial. At approximately 3:00 December 8, 2018, Chief Cowan, who was not on duty, summoned Sgt. Musante to meet him alone at Bayside Park, near a cemetery, in sub- freezing temperatures, in an obvious attempt at intimidation. Sgt. Musante appeared at this secluded location, in the middle of the night, and was immediately approached by Chief Cowan who stated ?I?m going to talk, you?re going to listen.? He continued that Sgt. Musante had ?f??cked up? when he forwarded his picture as part of the investigation into the mayoral campaign commercial. "He berated Sgt. Musante for showing the Major League Cuts employee a single picture instead of a photo book and indicated that the investigation could have been sent to the HCPO Internal Affairs . Prosecutor because giving a badge to non-of?cer is a crime. Chief Cowan expressed his displeasure with the fact that he could have been indictedand chastised Sgt. Musante for his role in supervising the detectives that conducted the investigation. During the same furtive meeting, Sgt. Musante recognized Chief Cowan?s intent to bypass him for promotion to lieutenant as Sgt. Musante was sitting on a promotional list and promotions were due when Chief Cowan suggested he take a position in the Narcotics Unitz, which he later failed to put him in. Sgt. Musante decided to accept the position anyway as he was fearful of further retaliation by Chief Cowan. The next day, approximately eight hours after his harrying meeting with Chief Cowan, Sgt. Musante advised Chief Cowan that he would accept the position in the Narcotics Unit. In respOnse, Chief Cowan told Sgt. Musante to think about who .he wanted as members of his squad, and was specifically told that he could have ?anyone but Erik Infantes.? Then, on December 13, 2013, without warning and before ng't. Musante assumed the position in the Narcotics Unit or selected his squad members, a Personnel Order was issued naming Sgt. Edward Nester as the new sergeant for the Narcotics Unit. Chief Cowan never addressed this 2 Interestingly, the position became available after Sgt. Anthony Tedesco was transferred to less prestigious post, along with three other CPD of?cers, almost immediately after issuing traffic summonses to a woman who aligned herself with the Fulop administration. The officers later filed a federal lawsuit against the City and Chief Cowan on January 10, 2014. Page 6 of 8 denial of the more favorable assignment with Sgt. Musante. However, on January 13, 2013, while Sgt. Musante was on duty at the scene of a shooting, he encountered Chief Cowan who addressed the issue merely by stating, ?that thing we talked about, it didn?t work out.? Later that night, as Sgt. Musante reported for his next tour of duty, he was served with disciplinary charges stemming from his reporting of missing equipment in approximately May 2013. These charges are a clear attempt by Chief Cowan to ?nd any possible excuse to bring disciplinary charges against Sgt. Musante in further retaliation for his involvement in the investigation of the mayoral campaign commercial as evidenced by the numerous procedural deficiencies. Immediately upon discovering the SIU recording equipment was missing, Sgt. Musante reported same to his supervisor, Lt. Ortiz who did not believe an Internal Affairs investigation was warranted.3 Months later, in August and September 2013, Chief Cowan and those that did his bidding requested memoranda from Sgt. Musante explaining the circumstances surrounding the missing SIU recording equipment. Sgt. Musante submitted the required paperwork but was never notified that he was the target of an Internal Affairs investigation nor was he interviewed about the missing SIU recording equipment. Yet, after another three months had passed, Sgt. Musante suddenly received disciplinary charges seeking possible removal, demotion and resignation as a result. of a minor infraction never even determined to be the fault of Sgt. Musante. It should be noted that Lt. Ortiz, who was also involved with the investigation of the mayoral campaign commercial, was also served with disciplinary charges related to the missing SIU recording equipment. . As a result of the continued harassment and retaliation, Sgt. Musante has experienced damage to his reputation and personnel record which will continue to affect his employability and future promotions. Sgt. Musante 3 Sgt. Musante had searched the entire SIU office, requested all SIU personnel check their respective vehicles, checked with HCPO and FBI personnel working with SIU and determined that the SIU of?ce had undergone construction, supervised by Chief?s Office personnel, causing equipment to be. moved by non?SIU personnel. Furthermore, all SIU personnel had access to the missing recording equipment but were not required to sign-out the equipment. Page 7 of 8 has also experienced increased stress and anxiety which have led to difficultly sleeping and a disruption of his family life. Claimant is a public employee and suffered retaliation and a hostile work environment resulting in an unwarranted transfer, the loss of a post in the Narcotics Unit and unwarranted retaliatory disciplinary charges. The Department and the City have failed to take any real or proper corrective action, despite being put on notice of the improper misconduct and have instead responded with efforts to harass, retaliate against and punish him because of his political affiliation and for voicing valid concerns and for engaging in protected speech activities. IV. General Description of the injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be know at the time of presentation of this claim; The course of conduct of the Department, the City and all the individuals named above violated the Department?s own written policies which contain a non-retaliation provision and has caused Claimant to suffer damages. Furthermore, the aforesaid unlawful conduct has resulted in intentional retaliation and harassment; civil rights violations; intentional in?iCtion of emotional distress; severe emotional upset; loss of reputation; loss of income; constitutional rights violations; 42 USC ?1983 violations; Violations of the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection .Act; violations of the New Jersey Civil RightsAct; statutory violations;_loss of consortium; and conspiracy. V. The name or names of other public entity, employee, or employees causing the injury, damage or loss, if known! 1. State of New Jersey, Dept. of Labor John Fitch Plaza PO. Box 110 Trenton, NJ 08625 2. State of New Jersey, Dept. of Labor Labor Standards Safety Enforcement (formerly Workplace Standards) 225 E. State Street Page 8 of 8 13,0. Box 054 Trenton, NJ 08625 V1. The amount claimed as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of the computation of the amount claimed: The amount claimed is $2,500,000.00 dollars. However, the extent of the injuries is ongoing and will continue to be revealed and ascertained through continuing discovery. Upon the completion of discovery, a preper presentation of the claim can be further ascertained. If there are any supplemental forms to answer, please provide a copy of said forms to my office immediately. LAW OFFICES OF GINA MENDOLA LONGARZO, LLC MENDOLA LONGARZO, ESQ. Attorneys for Claimant Dated: March 3, 2014 Anthony Musante