Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 1 of 19 PagelD: 1 Tracy L. Riley, Esquire Attorney ID 006862008 Michael E. Riley, Esquire Attorney ID 007511976 LAW OFFICES OF RILEY & RILEY 2 Eves Drive, Suite 109 Marlton, New Jersey 08053 (609) 914-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY TRENTON VICINAGE bn Plaintiff, vs. : COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND COUNTY OF OCEAN; COMMISSIONER, JOSEPH H. VICARI; COMMISSIONER, VIRGINIA E. HAINES; COMMISSIONER, BARBARA JOCREA; —: JOHN DOES 1 - 10; and JANE DOES 1 - 10, Defendants, Plaintiff, | and through her attorneys, Law Offices of Riley & Riley by way of Complaint against the defendants, both jointly and severally, respectfully states as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintitt, Es 2 resident of Ocean County, New Jersey and an employee of the defendant.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 2 of 19 PagelD: 2 4. 10. Defendant, County of Ocean is government entity chartered by the State of New Jersey and is located at 101 Hooper Avenue, Toms River, New Jersey. Defendant, Joseph H. Vicari is a Commissioner for the County of Ocean. Defendant Vicari is sued individually and in his official capacity. Defendant, Virginia Haines is a Commissioner for the County of Ocean. Defendant Haines is sued individually and in her official capacity. Defendant, Barbara Jo Crea is a Commissioner for the County of Ocean. Defendant Crea is sued individually and in her official capacity. Defendants, John Does 1-10 and Jane Does 1-10 are fictitious names heretofore- unidentified individuals who were responsible for the damages and/or harm to the Plaintiff outlined herein, JURISDICTION AND VENUE Each and all acts of defendants were performed under the color and pretense of the constitution, statutes, ordinances, regulations, customs and usages of the United States of America, the State of New Jersey, and the County of Ocean. The incidents which give rise to this cause of action occurred within this jurisdiction and over a period of years including one year of filing of this Complaint. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391, as all the defendants are residents of this di rict and/or all the acts or omissions which give rise to this cause of action occurred within this district. Jurisdiction is proper pursuant to federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. §1331, 28 US.C. §1343(a)(3)(4) and 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff further invokes the pendent andCase 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 3 of 19 PagelD: 3 supplemental jurisdiction of this Court to hear and decide claims arising under state law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367. FACTUAL ALLEGA’ 11, Plaintiff Is been employed by the Defendant, County of Ocean since July 21, 1998. NS 12. Plaintiff was assigned to the Office of Senior Services. 13. At this time, Plaintiff was a single mother of two little girls. 14. Atall times relevant herein, the Plaintiff has performed her duties up to or beyond the reasonable expectations of her employer. 15. Plaintiff was subjected to aver two decades of intimidation, a hostile work environment, an offensive work environment, sexual abuse and sexual harassment. 16. Defendant, Joseph Vicari was the then Freeholder, now Commissioner assigned to oversee the Office of Senior Services. 17. During the time of 2003 through 2004, then Freeholder, Defendant, Joseph Vicari would come into the office and make passes at the Plaintiff. 18, Defendant, Joseph Vicari would physical place himself in such a way that Plaintiff could not move, and he would rub into the Plaintiffs breasts. 19. Defendant, Joseph Vicari would call interoffice from his private office number and tell Plaintiff how attractive she was and that he could not believe Plaintiff was not dating anyone.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 4 of 19 PagelD: 4 20. Defendant, Joseph Vicari would lure the Plaintiff into his office by asking Plaintiff to bring him Senior Services documents and would close his office door behind her. 21. On or about June 6, 2004, Plaintiff was promoted to the position of Program Monitor and received a $19,000 raise. 22. Based on the “closed door” meetings and the raise, rumors started around the County that Plaintiff and Defendant, Joseph Vicari were romantically involved. 23. Plaintiff was NEVER romantically or sexually involved with Defendant, Joseph. Vicari. 24, Plaintiff's promotion came at a price and Defendant, Joseph Vicari's advances continued even more. 25. Defendant, Joseph Vicari would call the Plaintiff all hours of the night asking that she do extra work. This was just an excuse he used to talk to her to make sure she was not with someone else. 26. Defendant, Joseph Vicari would follow the Plaintiff to various speaking engagements to seniors about Medicare. 27. Defendant, Joseph Vicari would introduce the Plaintiff as the Assistant Director at these engagements creating issues with Plaintiff's then supervisor, Jane Maloney. 28, Plaintiff was not comfortable wearing a skirt to work. 29. At monthly meetings, Defendant, Joseph Vicari would sit next to the Plaintiff and put his hand on Plaintiffs thigh under the table. 30, Defendant, Joseph Vicari constantly insinuated that if she reported him, she would not only get any future promotions, but Plaintiff would also lose her job.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 5 of 19 PagelD: 5 31, Defendant, Joseph Vicari required Plaintiff to take him to work events. 32, When Plaintiff questioned Defendant, Joseph Vicari about taking him to these events he reminded Plaintiff that it was part of her job. 33. After one of these events in Monmouth County, he insisted on stopping to get something to eat where Plaintiff and Defendant, Commissioner Vicari ran into, Keith Goetting the Director of Ocean County Department of Employee Relations and his family. 34, Defendant, Joseph Vicari's wife was out of town. He directed Plaintiff to deliver Se Services paperwork to his home since it was Plaintiffs job. 35. In fear of losing her job and providing for her two children, Plaintiff complied 36. When Plaintiff arrived at Defendant, Joseph Vicari’s home he advised Plaintiff that his wife wasn’t home, and he wanted to show her the house. 37. Plaintiff advised Defendant, Joseph Vicari that she needed to get back to the office. 38. Defendant, Joseph Vicari reminded Plaintiff that HE WAS THE BOSS, and the office could wait. 39, Defendant, Joseph Vicari made advances at the Plaintiff and tried to undress her. 40. In fear, Plaintiff froze as Defendant Vicari began unbuttoning her shirt then put his hand under her shirt and fondled her breast. 41. On March 10, 2005, the Ocean County Federation of Republican Women named then Freeholder, Defendant Joseph Vicari as Man of the Year and Plainti(t, | 42, Defendant, Joseph Vicari used this as an opportunity to continue to make advances at the Plaintiff.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 6 of 19 PagelD: 6 43, Defendant, Joseph Vicari was relentless. He had to continue to stand next to the Plaintiff and would tell individuals that approached, Plaintiff was friends with his daughter. 44, After years of sexual assault and harassment, Plaintiff began to he singled out by her direct supervisor, Jane Maloney. 45. On May 25, 2011, Plaintiff submitted a letter to Keith Goetting, Director of Ocean County Department of Employee relations consenting to a transfer. 46, Plaintiff tried to get away from the direct contact with Defendant, Joseph Vicari and transferred to the Human Services Department as the Coordinator for Individuals with Disabilities. 47. Despite these efforts, the Plaintiff could not get away from the Defendant, Joseph Vicari sexual assault and sexual abuse. 48, Defendant, Joseph Vicari would have meetings in the third-floor conference room and unfortunately, Plaintiffs office was right next door. 49. Defendant, Joseph Vicari would wander into Plaintiff's office and grab her breasts. 50, Plaintiff remained in fear of losing her job. 51. After dealing with years of physical and emotional abuse at the hands of her boss, Defendant, Joseph Vicari, Plaintiff took a three month leave of absence from February 1, 2012 through April 30, 2012. 52. Defendant, Joseph Vicari still had the ability to control Plaintiff's employment with the County of Ocean. 53. On December 5, 2013, Plaintiff submitted her resume to the Ocean County Freeholder Board to be considered as the Director of Office of Senior Services.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 7 of 19 PagelD: 7 54, Plaintiff was punished and did not receive the position for failing to agree to Defendant, Joseph Vicari's advances, 55. Defendant, Joseph Vicari told the Plaintiff, “You didn’t get the job because of me.” 56. Plaintiff continued to work hard for the Defendant, County of Ocean for their seniors and individuals with disabilities. 57. In January 2015, Plaintiff began working as the Coordinator for the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women. 58. On August 21, 2017, Plaintiff had a meeting with Keith Goetting to discuss another matter. During this meeting, Plaintiff disclosed to Mr. Goetting that Defendant Vicari was sexually harassing her. 59. Despite this complaint, no investigation was conducted and no action was taken by Defendant, County of Ocean. 60. On or about November of 2017, Plaintiff became the Building Facilitator of the Southern Service Center. 61. Defendant, Joseph Vicari attended a meeting in November of 2017, on the third floor. 62. Defendant, Joseph Vicari asked Plaintiff's co-worker where she was. 63. Defendant, Joseph Vicari sought Plaintiff out once again to sexually assault and harass her. 64. Defendant, Joseph Vicari saw this move as another opportunity to make unwanted advances at the Plaintiff.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 8 of 19 PagelD: 8 65. On December 16, 2017, Plaintiff attended a breakfast at Captain's Inn, Defendant, Joseph Vicari was there, following the Plaintiff around and made physical advances at the Plaintiff. 66. On or about August 29, 2018, Plaintiff was at an event with Congressman Tom McArthur, 67. Defendant, Joseph Vicari saw this as yet another opportunity to make unwanted sexual advances. 68, Defendant, Joseph Vicari approached the Plaintiff and stated he had not seen her for awhile but that she looked good. 69. Defendant, Joseph Vicari then proceeded to tell the Plaintiff that “he could really make her happy” and “ her breasts were beautiful”. 70. Looking was still not enough for Defendant, Joseph Vicari, he took this opportunity to once again sexually assault and harass Plaintiff by rubbing up against her as he walked by. 71.As part of her job duties, Plaintiff attended the ribbon cutting of the Ocean County Southern Service Center Nutrition site on or about May 15, 2019, 72. Defendant Commissioner, Joseph Vicari, Defendant Commissioner, Virginia Haines and Commissioner, Gary Quinn attended the ribbon cutting ceremony. 73. Defendant, Joseph Vicari was certain to arrive early so that he had an opportunity to corner the Plaintiff once again. While alone in her office, Defendant, Joseph Vicari sexually assaulted and harassed the Plaintiff. 74, After being sexually assaulted and harassed, Plaintiff was forced to go and perform her job duties at the ribbon cutting event.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 9 of 19 PagelD: 9 75, Defendant, Virginia Haines was quoted during this ceremony as stating, “With more than 173,000 seniors living in Ocean County, the senior programs and services under the leadership of Freeholder Vicari are second to none.” 76. At the time Defendant, Virginia Haines made this statement she was fully aware that Defendant, Joseph Vicari had been named in a sexual harassment lawsuit. 77.At the time Defendant, Virginia Haines made this statement she was fully aware that the Defendant, County of Ocean had paid $550,000 to settle the lawsuit naming Defendant, Joseph Vicari. 78. Cornering the Plaintiff in her office before the ceremony was not enough for Defendant, Joseph Vicari. 79. After the ribbon cutting ceremony was complete, Defendant, Joseph Vicari directed Plaintiff to give him a private tour of the facility. 80. Defendant, Joseph Vicari cornered Plaintiff once again and told her, “I bet you missed me.” 81. This was not the only tour the Defendant, Joseph Vicari sought. In March of 2021, Defendant Vicari brought Director, Stephen Scaturro to tour the Ocean County Southern Service Center Nutrition facility. 82. While Director, Stephen Scaturro was talking elsewhere, Defendant, Joseph Vicari cornered Plaintiff again to sexually assault and harass the Plaintiff. 83. Defendant, Joseph Vicari saw this as yet another opportunity to fondle Plaintiff's breasts and to tell her how good she looked. 64, Plaintiff continued to be in fear of losing her job and of her reputation.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 10 of 19 PagelD: 10 85. Plaintiff continued to be confronted with an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment. 86. On May 13, 2021 at 2:17 p.m, Plaintiff received a telephone call on her cell phone that she did not answer. 87. The blocked caller, Defendant, Joseph Vicari, left the following message: “Hey Marie, how you doing. It’s Joe, when you get a chance give mea call on my cell phone, You have my number.” 88. Before Plaintiff could even listen to the voicemail message, Plaintiff received another call on May 13, 2021 at 2:26 p.m. which she answered - it was the Defendant, Joseph Vicari. 89. Defendant, Joseph Vicari proceeds to tell the Plaintiff that he had attended the retirement party of Ocean County employee, Sue Kaiser. 90. In this conversation, Defendant, Joseph Vicari told Plaintiff that Sue Kaiser is “so obsessed with him that she follows him around’, “she has multiple pictures of him hanging around’, “Kaiser is jealous because she didn’t want him (Vicari) to be with me (Plaintiff).” 91. After years of harassment and abuse, Plaintiff finally had the courage to stand up to the Defendant, Joseph Vicari. 92. Plaintiff told Defendant, Joseph Vicari that his sexual abuse and harassment had to stop. 93. Plaintiff told Defendant, Joseph Vicari she was tired of being threatened and asked to do something she didn’t want to do because she was afraid of losing her job.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 11 of 19 PagelD: 11 94, Plaintiff told Defendant, Joseph Vicari her life had been ruined because ofhim due to the emotional distress he put her through, the sexual assault and harassment, the false rumors, the impact on her reputation and her career. 95. Plaintiff told Defendant, Joseph Vicari she was getting married, and she wanted to be left alone. 96. The Commissioner, Defendant, Joseph Vicari ended the call with ~ “nobody will make you as happy as I did.” 97. Despite having the courage to finally confront her boss and her abuser, Plaintiff contacted Robert A. Greitz, Director of Employee Relations, a representative of the Defendant, County of Ocean, to once again report the years of sexual assault and harassment by Defendant, Joseph Vicari. 98. Plaintiff met with Director Greitz and Personnel Specialist, Patricia Burke on several occasions to report multiple incidents of sexual assault and sexual harassment caused by Defendant, Joseph Vicari. 99. On September 28, 2021, Plaintiff sat with Defendant, Barbara Jo Crea at a Chamber of Commerce Women in Business Meeting at the Hotel LBI. 100. _Plaintiff and Defendant, Crea spoke at length about Defendant, Ocean County. Defendant Crea asked Plaintiff why she was not with Senior Services. 101. _ Plaintiff told Defendant, Crea about the sexual assaults and sexual harassment that she had been subjected to by Defendant, Vicari, 102, On February 28, 2022, Defendant, Crea called Plaintiff to discuss an upcoming meeting they were both scheduled to attend. 103. Defendant Crea did not want Plaintiff to reveal any prior conversationsCase 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 12 of 19 PagelD: 12 104. At the time Plaintiff made the report to Director Greitz, the Defendant, County of Ocean had a policy against discrimination and harassment that was issued by the Board of Chosen Freeholders on November 19, 2020. 105. Plaintiff complied with the reporting procedures by selecting Director Robert Greitz to report the intimidating, hostile, offensive, sexually harassing work environment she was subjected to, 106. After reporting these serious allegations to the representative of the Defendant, County of Ocean, upon information and belief, the Defendant, Joseph Vicari was told to stay away from the Plaintiff, not to call or have contact with the Plaintiff. 107. Plaintiff was directed not to enter the Ocean County Administration Building without an escort. 108. After receiving additional job duties Plaintiff was not comfortable performing, she sought a transfer back to Senior Services. 109. The current Director of Human Resources and the Director of the Senior Center both agreed to Plaintiff transferring back to Senior Services subject to certain Commissioner's approval. 110. Defendant, Joseph Vicari has a supervisory role over the current department Plaintiff is assigned. 111. _ Based on the Commissioner assignments, Defendants, Joseph Vicarl, Virginia Haines and Barbara Jo Crea had the ability to agree or disagree with the transfer of the Plaintiff.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 13 of 19 PagelD: 13 112. Defendants refused to transfer Plaintiff to the Senior Center in retaliation for her reporting the actions of Defendant, Joseph Vicari. 113. Upon information and belief, this is not the first time that Defendant, joseph Vicari was accused of sexual harassment. 114. Defendant, Joseph Vicari prefers to be referred to as the “Italian Stallion”. 115. Despite their knowledge of Defendant, Joseph Vicari’s prior history, nothing has been done to hold him accountable for his actions. 116. Defendant, County of Ocean has a custom, policy and practice of failing to supervise and train their employees on discrimination and harassment. 117. Plaintiff has been employed with the Defendant, County of Ocean for over 23 years. 118. In all of her years of service, Plaintiff herself has only received training once prior to reporting the harassment and hostile work environment that she was repeatedly subjected to. 119. Despite the prior lawsuit filed in 2014, Rosemary Mennona v. Joseph Vicari, et al., Defendant, County of Ocean failed to provide training to all of their employees. COUNT ‘Sexual Harassment Under New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination 120. Plaintiff hereby incorporates, in their entirety, each and every paragraph contained in this complaint and by reference makes said paragraphs a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. 121, Defendants have discriminated against Plaintiff in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination by subjecting her to disparate treatment because of her gender.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 14 of 19 PagelD: 14 122. Asa direct and proximate result of the Defendant's unlawful discriminatory conduction in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer financial and economic damages as well as severe mental anguish and emotional distress, including but not limited to, depression, humiliation, embarrassment, stress and anxiety, loss of self-esteem and self-confidence, and emotional pain and suffering. 123. Defendants’ unlawful discriminatory conduct constitutes a willful and wanton violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, was outrageous and malicious, was intended to injure Plaintiff, and was done with reckless indifference to Plaii civil rights, entitling Plaintiff to an award of punitive damages WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants upon her claim for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other relief as may be equitable and just. COUNT IT Retaliatory Harassment Under New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination 124. Plaintiff hereby incorporates, in their entirety, each and every paragraph contained in this complaint and by reference makes said paragraphs a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. 125. For the reasons set forth above, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for retaliatory harassment In violation of the Law Against Discrimination. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants upon her claim for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other relief as may be equitable and just.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 15 of 19 PagelD: 15 COUNT LIL Reprisal Under New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination 126. Plaintiff hereby incorporates, in their entirety, each and every paragraph contained in this complaint and by reference makes said paragraphs a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. 127. For the reasons set forth above, the Defendants conduct constitutes retaliation under the Law Against Discrimination and renders them liable to plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants upon her claim for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other relief as may be equitable and just. COUNT IV Violation of New Jersey's Civil Rights Act, NJ.S.A. 10:6-1 to -2 128. Plaintiff hereby incorporates, in their entirety, each and every paragraph contained in this complaint and by reference makes said paragraphs a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. 129. Defendants have deprived the Plaintiff of substantive due process or equal protection rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. 130. Defendants have deprived the Plaintiff of substantive rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the State of New Jersey. 131. Defendants have interfered with Plaintiff's exercise of enjoyment of substantive rights, privileges or immunities by threats, intimidation, or coercion.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 16 of 19 PagelD: 16 132, Defendants acted under color of state law at all times mentioned herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants upon her claim for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other reliefas may be equitable and just. COUNTV Deprivation of Federally Protected Rights Under 42 US.CA. §1983 133, Plaintiff hereby incorporates, in their entirety, each and every paragraph contained in this complaint and by reference makes said paragraphs a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants upon her claim for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other reliefas may be equitable and just. COUNT VI Deprivation of Federally Protected Rights Under 42 U.S.C.A. §1983 Monell Claim 134, Plaintiff hereby incorporates, in their entirety, each and every paragraph contained in this complaint and by reference makes said paragraphs a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. 135. Defendant, County of Ocean is liable for the deprivation of Plaintiff's federally protected rights, as described in the foregoing causes of action.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 17 of 19 PagelD: 17 136, Atall relevant times, the Defendant, County of Ocean was responsible for the training of all employees in the County of Ocean in the prevention of discrimination pursuant to the Law Against Discrimination 137. Defendant has repeatedly and knowingly fatled to enforce the laws of the United States, the State of New Jersey and the regulations of the County of Ocean, thereby creating an atmosphere of lawlessness, whereby actions on violation for the law set forth herein are condoned and justified by their superiors. 138, Atthe times described above, Defendant has developed and maintained policies or customs exhibiting deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of persons in the County of Ocean. 139. It was the policy and/or custom of the Defendant, County of Ocean and the other Defendants herein to inadequately and improperly supervise and train its employees and to inadequately and improperly investigate complaints made by employees. 140, Asa result of the above-described policies and customs, individuals such as Defendant Commissioner, Joseph Vicari believed that their actions would not be properly monitored by supervisory personnel and that misconduct in connection with employment matters would not be investigated or sanctioned but - would be tolerated. 141. Byreason of the aforesaid violation of Piainti AAA PIaintiff is entitled to recover damages under 42 US.C. 61983. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant, County of Ocean upon her claim for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other relief as may be equitable and just.Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 18 of 19 PagelD: 18 DESIGNATION OF TRIAL COUNSEL Pursuant to R, 4:25-4, notice is hereby given that Tracy Riley, Esquire and Michael Riley, Esquire are designated as trial counsel for the within matter. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 4:5-1 ‘The undersigned, an attorney at law in the State of New Jersey, hereby certifies that, to the best of my present knowledge, the within matter is not the subject of any other actions or arbitration proceeding, nor are any such other actions or arbitration proceedings presently contemplated in this matter. NOTICE OF LITIGATION HOLD The parties are hereby required to preserve all physical and electronic information that may be relevant to the issues to be raised, including but not limited to, Plaintiff's employment, Plaintiff's cause of action, request for relief, to any defenses to same, and pertaining to any party, including but not limited to, electronic data storage, close circuit tv footages, digital images, computer images, cache memory, searchable data, emails, spreadsheets, employment files, memos, text messages and any and all online social or work related websites, entries on social networking sites (including but not limited to, Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, ete.) and any other information and/or data and/or things and/or documents which may be relevant to any claim or defense in this litigation, Failure to do so may result in separate claims for spoliation of evidence and/or for appropriate adverse inferencesCase 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 19 of 19 PagelD: 19 The obligation to preserve evidence begins when a party knows or should have known that the evidence is relevant to future or current litigation. You are on notice of litigation and therefore have an obligation to suspend your routine document retention/destruction policy and put in place a “litigation hold” to ensure preservation of relevant documents.” JURY DEMAND The Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all of the triable issues of this complaint, pursuant to New Jersey Court Rules 1:8-2(b) and 4:35-1(a). Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES OF RILEY & RILEY // Tracy L. Riley Tracy L. Riley, Esquire (s/Michael B. Riley Michael E. Riley, Esquire Dated: May 11, 2022Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1-1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 1 of 2 PagelD: 20 1544 (rev. 0421) CIVIL COVER SHEET ‘The St ii cover sheet nd the information contained hatcn niet replace nr sopplament the Sling acd servic of pledge o ther paper a eu by la, xcept os provided by local rus ofeout. This form, approved by the Juda Couecace of te United Sates in Sepcber 197, segue fer he ute ft Clk of Cou frie Purpose of ning the evi docket het.” GEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEAT PAGE OF TS FOR) 1. @ PLAINTIFFS ‘DEFENDANTS a County of esan, Commiesoner Vicar, Commissioner Haines. Commissioner Crea, John Daas. Jane Does 1-10 (8) County ofResdence of Fit Listed Pint’ Ocean (Couty of Rendens of Fit Listed Defeedeet Qcgan (ERCEPT OV US PLANTIEE CASES) (avs reanwrine cases on LWOTE, INLAND CONDEMNATION CASES US THELOCATION OF (©) Asem re Name tr and Tepane mb) Atoneys enn) Tracy L. RileyMichael E. leyLaw Office Riley & Riley, 2 Eves Dr,,Ste 109,Mariton NJ 08053 609-914-0300 IL, BASIS OF JURISDICTION aceon Ow aor On) [IML CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (racer =m ose pur Panag enero eeernns Ci Use Hea ara i” one “ae aan cimenioe OE segenaenitae Che Oe smear vague Dy cimthateten CO} C1? hopeninanvcsites O14 Ot sce cn fis ei cimsits OC) tr oe oe wis! NATURE OFS aa Gaecae na Came a amare 1 — TR aaRROT Pee, fl Sageer ame ae obese Patera Sr. eae ORE, Cunde Siete PEERS colic sseeticrgem Pemieerioan Rams Seer Sea none Bek atte Ra, soe Fata a E Slee ABE caterer smear See ion Paecren See Fulda, oNrene™ Feralas Pe Fates vofeceree SMEEacee CENT Pe oe Frvorercaen eat Elswouereoa” Feuer or Beer cehameee Smee, Pome Her 195 Francine try (138s Property Damage 1240 Raibway Labor Act (262 Black img (920) $50 SscuntneCommodins! seize, nanmae stim Sota a! et i SESE bbe nae mere —|—one pe monn Hommes” — HSencmonts a Bee Breen ce Soc. PaaS Sacra, Bini nm Hideto Hstimeion a sie Hoesy ee pe eect ane ences mini St ae Hier, Fuctsce SStey — -amome—Hoce” P ities =f Fasr—| b we = seem PRS = win Ean Hassan Sate VUNG aa Fao Gite Ep eoewebe” (j3 Remade (4 mime (2 Panta (ye tens A ma, Ore? Komen Ot Riemer Ores tage ‘se a VI. CAUSE OF ACTION [eee US in Stu unr which you lg nor i teal tr nls rr [as USC. 139,28 US. 1851, 8US.C TAM ONSN) US.C 1863, 20US.G 1307 Bf dscinion of enn [on ge Vato ‘Vil REQUESTED IN] CHECKIFTHISISA CLASSACTION DEMANDS CHEER VES ely comme ca COMPLAINT: UNDER RULES, FR.GW? suny DEMAND: Eves _CINo VIII. RELATED CASE(S) AF ANY Sa hee DOCKET NUMBER DAE ‘ONATUREGF ATTORNEY OF RECORD TOU May 14,2022 ee SAG x FOR OFICE ISEONTY t recerre oust A27LYING TE, cd MAG 10008,Case 3:22-cv-02760-FLW-DEA Document 1-1 Filed 05/11/22 Page 2 of 2 PagelD: 21 38.4 Ravan (Rv 0421) INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44 ‘Athority For Civil Cover Sheet “The 1S 44 civil cover shest and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the fling and service of pleading o other papers at required by law, except as provided by local rues of cour. This form, approve by te Judicial Conference of de United Sates in Sept 1974, 5 ‘required fr the use ofthe Clerk of Cour forthe purpose of ntiatng the civil docket sheet. Consequently civil cover shet is submited to the Clerk of (Cour for cach civil complaint filed. The atomey filing «cane should complete the frm as fellows: @) o o vm. Plaintff-Defendants. Enter names (as, frst, middle inital) of plaintiff and defendant. tbe plant or defendants government agency, use cnly the fll namo or standard abbreviations Ifthe plain or defendant i en officiel within a goverament agency, deny fist the agency and thon the oficial, giving both name and ile County of Residence. For each civil ease fled, except U.S. plaintiff caces, ener the name of the county where the frst sted plaintiff resides atthe time of filing In US. plaintiff cases, enter the name ofthe county in which the Gist iste defendant resides atthe tne of ling, (NOTE: In land ‘condermation cases, the county of residence ofthe "defendant isthe location ofthe tract of land involved) ‘Attorneys, Eater te firm name, address, telephone number, and atoray of record, If thee are several altoreys, ist them onan atachment, ating inthis section "(se attachment)" ‘Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction i et forth under Rule 8(2), F-R.Cv-P, which require that jurisdictions be chown in pleadings. Place in one ofthe boxes, I there is more than one basis of jurscicton, precedence i given inthe order shown Below. United States plainf®. (1) Iuradcton based on 28 S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are inched here ‘United Stes defendant, 2) Wha the plant is suing the United States its officers or agcacies, place en "X" inthis box. Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constiution of the Unied States, an smendiment to the Constitution, an act of Congress or atenty ofthe United States. In cates where the U.S ie party, the US. plaintiff or defendant code takas precedence, and box 1 oF 2 should be marked Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where partes ae citizens of diffrent states. When Box 4 is checked, the citiznnaip ofthe different partes must be checked. (See Section If below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases) ox Residence (itizenship) of Principal Parties, This section ofthe 1S 44 is to be completed i diversity of citizenship was indiated shove, Ma this section for each principal party. esoeated withthe cae, pick the mature of uit code [Nature of Suit. Place an" inthe appropriate bos. Ifthere are multiple nature af suit code that is most applicable. Click ere for. Nature of Suit Code Desriovions. Origin. Place an "X" in one ofthe seven boxes Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district cours. Removed from State Court. 2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Tile 26 U.S.C, Section 1441 ‘Remanded from Appellate Cour. (3) Chock his box forceces remanded othe district court for further action. Use the dete of remand asthe fling dee. Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for case reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date asthe fling date “Tranfered from Another Distict, (8) For cates transfered under Title 28 U.S.C. Section I404(e). Do not ue hs for within dre wanafors or smulldstct ligation wansters, ‘Multi Litgeion ~ Treaster, (6) Check this box when a mulddistct case is ransfered int the istrict under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407, Multdistict Litigation ~Direct File. (8) Check his bon when « muldisict case sled inthe same dist asthe Master MDL. docket, PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records an is no longer relevant due to change in true. Cause of Action. Report the civil taut dzetly related to the cause of action and giv a brief description ofthe cause. Do not elt Jurisdictional statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil State: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable sevice ‘Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "Xin this box if you are filing a classaction under Rule 23, FRLCv.P. [Demnd. In this space enter the setal dolla ammount being demanded or indies other demand, such as prelieninary ijuncton Jury Demand. Check te appropiate box. (o indicate whether or nota jury is being demanded. Related Cases, This section ofthe IS 44 ie wood to roference related ponding cases, if'any. If her aro related ponding cases, inset the docket ‘numbers and the coresponding judge memes for such cases. Date and Attorney Signature, Date and sign the civil cover sheet,