1

LOUIS A. ZAYAS, ESQ. (LZ-1881)

LAW OFFICES OF LOUIS A. ZAYAS, LLC

8901 Kennedy Boulevard, 5th Floor

North Bergen, N.J. 07047

Counsel for the Plaintiff

Tel: (201) 977-2900

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

ENID SANTIAGO,

Plaintiff

v.

NEW YORK & NEW JERSEY PORT

AUTHORITY, TUNNEL & BRIDGE

AGENT GREGORY NOA, ANTHONY

FITZGERALD, TIMOTHY MCGOVERN,

SERGEANT FLEMMINGS, CAPTAIN

BURNS, CHIEF CHARLES TORRES, sued

individually, jointly and severally,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No.:______________

COMPLAINT

The Plaintiff, Enid Santiago, by and through her attorney, Louis A. Zayas, Esq, of the

Law Offices of Louis A. Zayas, LLC, alleges as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. This is a civil action brought by the Plaintiff for declaratory and injunctive relief,

compensatory and punitive damages to redress violations of his civil rights secured under the

Title 42 U.S.C. '1983.

PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Enid Santiago is a Hispanic female hired as a New York & New Jersey

Port Authority police officer in October 17, 2008, (hereinafter “P.O. Santiago”). At all times

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID: 1
2

relevant to this complaint, P.O. Santiago resided in the City of Belleville, County of Essex. New

Jersey.

3. Defendant New York & New Jersey Port Authority is a corporation organized by

virtue of New York and New Jersey law, and pursuant to that law, is to be known and

distinguished by the name “Port Authority.” Defendant Port Authority is sued to affect the full

declaratory, injunctive, compensatory damages demanded by the Plaintiff.

4. Defendant Gregory Noa (“TBA NOA”) was and is still employed at all relevant

times by Port Authority as a Tunnel & Bridge Agent. TBA Noa, a white male, is sued in his

individual capacity for the purpose of effecting the compensatory and punitive damages

demanded by the Plaintiff as alleged herein.

5. Lieutenant Anthony Fitzgerald (“Lt. Fitzgerald”) was and is still employed at all

relevant times by Port Authority as a law enforcement officer. Lt. Fitzgerald, a white male, is

sued in his individual capacity for the purpose of effecting the compensatory and punitive

damages demanded by the Plaintiff as alleged herein.

6. Lieutenant Timothy McGovern (“Lt. McGovern”) was and is still employed at all

relevant times by Port Authority as a law enforcement officer. Lt. McGovern, a white male, is

sued in his individual capacity for the purpose of effecting the compensatory and punitive

damages demanded by the Plaintiff as alleged herein.

7. Sergeant Flemming (“Sgt. Flemming”) was and is still employed at all relevant

times by Port Authority as a law enforcement officer and Plaintiff’s supervisor. Sgt. Flemming, a

white male, is sued in his individual capacity for the purpose of effecting the compensatory and

punitive damages demanded by the Plaintiff as alleged herein.

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 2 of 11 PageID: 2
3

8. Captain Burns “(“Captain Burns”) was and is still employed at all relevant times

by Port Authority as a law enforcement officer and Plaintiff’s supervisor. Captain Burns, a white

male, is sued in his individual capacity for the purpose of effecting the compensatory and

punitive damages demanded by the Plaintiff as alleged herein

FACTS

9. As described more fully herein, Defendant Port Authority and

named defendants others have engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of harassment,

disparate treatment, discrimination and retaliation against Hispanic, minorities, and female

employees, including, but not limited to assessing unfair and harsher discipline, instigating

arbitrary and unfounded Internal Affairs charges and investigations, discriminatory work

assignments, discriminatory performance standards and evaluations, and unfair, closer and more

stringent monitoring and oversight.

10. On October 17, 2008, Port Authority hired P.O. Santiago as a recruit for

the Police Academy Class of 111. P.O. Santiago successfully completed the twenty-eight week

police academy and was sworn as a Port Authority police officer on April 13, 2009.

As is customary, P.O. Santiago was placed on one year probation. After

completing one year of employment, P.O. Santiago’s status as a probationary police officer was

to become permanent, meaning that Port Authority could terminate her employment only upon a

showing of good cause after an administrative hearing.

11. On October 6, 2009, P.O. Santiago was assigned to the Lincoln Tunnel.

P.O. Santiago’s duties and responsibilities relating to the Lincoln Tunnel assignment

included, but not limited to, supervising the safe and lawful movement of vehicular

traffic going in and out of the Lincoln Tunnel. While on duty, P.O. Santiago responded

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 3 of 11 PageID: 3
4

to an “over-height” alarm, which meant that the trailer truck was too tall to enter actual

tunnel. In an effort to direct the trailer truck away from the tunnel, P.O. Santiago notified

her command that she was going to help turn around the trailer. While P.O. Santiago was

performing her police duties in directing traffic, TBA Noa arrived at the scene and began to

direct traffic creating unnecessary confusion and danger.

12. As a Tunnel and Bridge Agent, TBA Noa is not authorized to perform

such police functions as directing traffic. Notwithstanding his complete lack of authority to

engage in such police related functions, TBA Noa deliberately ignored P.O. Santiago’s

order to stop interfering with her police duties. TBA Noa refused to stop. P.O. Santiago

requested assistance. In response to her call, two white Port Authority police officers

, P.O. Anthony Giardullo and P.O. Pimenta, arrived at the scene to assist P.O Santiago,

including helping her deal with TBA Noa who was insulting and obstructing P.O.

Santiago’s official duties. As a result of TBA Noa’s unauthorized actions in directing

traffic and deliberate defiance of P.O. Santiago’s instruction to cease and desist, the

aforementioned trailer truck crashed into another vehicle creating a dangerous situation in

the Lincoln Tunnel.

13. After her duty shift ended, P.O. Santiago filed a complaint on a

hand-written memorandum to Captain Burns alleging that TBA Noa had interfered with

her duties as a police officer causing a motor vehicle accident. P.O. Santiago requested

an official investigation regarding TBA Noa incident. Because of the chain of

command, P.O. Santiago was prohibited from complaining to the press.

14. The purpose of P.O. Santiago’s complaint against TBA Noa, which was

not required by her official duties, was intended to place Port Authority on notice

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 4 of 11 PageID: 4
5

that TBA Noa’s conduct represented an imminent danger to the safety and security of

millions of motorist who regularly use the Lincoln Tunnel every year. P.O. Santiago

further sought to petition the governing body of Port Authority, by and through the

appropriate chain of command, to initiate corrective action to prevent any further security

breaches.

15. Having worked for the Department of Homeland Security, P.O. Santiago

was aware that the Lincoln Tunnel is widely seen as a terrorist target because of its terrible costs

in terms of human life but its devastating consequences to New York City’s financial lifeline if

one of its principal transportation routes is destroyed. P.O. Santiago’s complaint to Port

Authority constitutes protected speech because her complaint regarding TBA Noa’s reckless

interference with law enforcement operations in the Lincoln Tunnel touches upon a matter of

public interest and concern.

16. By virtue of P.O. Santiago’s complaint to Port Authority, P.O. Santiago was, in

fact, petitioning the governing body of Port Authority to address her grievance against TBA Noa,

an activity protected by the First Amendment.

17. When the defendants learned of P.O. Santiago’s complaint regarding his conduct

on October 6, 2008, he and the named individual defendants caused Port Authority to initiate a

sham internal affairs investigation to retaliate against P.O. Santiago for having complained about

such security shortcomings by Port Authority. In particular Sergeant Flemming and Captain

Burns intentionally filed misleading if not false information in connection with their sham

internal affairs investigation. The defendants Lt. McGovern and Fitzgerald, acting in concert

with defendants Sgt. Flemming and Captain Burns, further sought to silence and discredit P.O.

Santiago and others by defaming her professional reputation by alleging that she had lied in her

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 5 of 11 PageID: 5
6

police report regarding the motor vehicle accident. In furtherance of the scheme to discredit and

disparage P.O. Santiago, TBA Noa and others, acting in concert with him, accused P.O. Santiago

and the two white officers of “conspiring” to file false information in their respective police

reports.

17. Upon information and belief, TBA Noa has a history of hindering police operations

in and around the Lincoln Tunnel. Despite this documented history of misconduct and

obstruction, Port Authority has failed to take any remedial action to correct the problem, in part,

because of TBA Noa’s political connections to top management in Port Authority. As a result of

TBA Noa’s political connections, Port Authority protects TBA Noa from disciplinary actions.

18. Upon information and belief, Port Authority Sgt. Flemming, Captain Burns, Lt.

Fitzgerald and Lt. McGovern, acting in concert with each other and other known and unknown

individuals, attempted to induce the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office to initiate criminal

charges against P.O. Santiago for falsify police records. Because of the lack of actionable

evidence to initiate criminal proceedings, the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Officer refused to file

any criminal charges against P.O. Santiago. During the sham investigation, the individual

defendants, including Lieutenant Fitzgerald and McGovern, recklessly defamed P.O. Santiago by

accusing her of “lying” and “falsifying records” in connection with her motor vehicle report of

the aforementioned accident.

19. On or about April 13, 2010, Port Authority terminated P.O. Santiago, one day before

she was to become a permanent police officer. In violation of its rules and regulations, Port

Authority terminated P.O. Santiago without an opportunity to be heard. Although P.O. Anthony

Giardullo and P.O. Pimenta were involved in the same incident with TBA Noa and filed similar

complaints as P.O. Santiago, the white Port Authority police officer were not disciplined,

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 6 of 11 PageID: 6
7

reprimanded, defamed, or terminated as P.O. Santiago. Prior to her termination from Port

Authority, P.O. Santiago was performing her duties and responsibilities in a satisfactory manner

20. On or about April 20, 2010, a high ranking police supervisor, Chief Charles

Torres defamed P.O. Enid Santiago during a routine roll call attended by numerous police

officers. Upon information and belief, Chief Torres disclosed the results of the aforementioned

internal affairs investigation, which was confidential, and stated that P.O. Santiago “lied” and/or

was otherwise dishonest as a police officer. Chief Torres further stated that the reason P.O.

Santiago was terminated was because of P.O. Santiago having filed a false police report,

referring to the filing of P.O. Santiago’s police report regarding the motor vehicle accident

involving TBA Noa. During that roll call, Chief Torres did not accuse any of the white police

officers of lying or otherwise filing false police reports.

21. Because of the individual defendants’ defamatory remarks and given the reason

for P.O. Santiago’s termination, namely acts of lying and dishonesty, P.O. Santiago’s liberty and

property interests in her professional reputation and prospective employment has been damaged.

Because of defendants’ actions, P.O. Santiago is unable to secure employment as a law

enforcement officer.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

§§ 1981 & 1983

INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS

22. All of the allegations in each of the foregoing paragraphs are incorporated

by references as if fully set forth herein.

23. Individual Defendants, Lt. Fitzgerald, Lt. McGovern, Sgt. Flemming,

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 7 of 11 PageID: 7
8

Captain Burns, Chief Torres and TBA and Noa acting under the color of law, infringed upon

Plaintiff right to make and enforce contracts and otherwise enjoy the privileges and rights as a

white citizen, as secured under §§ 1981, equal protection under the law, due process, and First

Amendment right to free speech and petition the government for redress. Each and every

defendant was personally involved in setting in motion Plaintiff’s unlawful termination and

damage to her liberty and property interest in her professional reputation.

24. Alternatively, the individual defendants who were not personally involved in

violating Plaintiff’s constitutional rights are liable to Plaintiff for not intervening to stop the

aforementioned constitutional violations.

25. As a direct and proximate cause of the aforementioned; Plaintiff was deprived of

her federal constitutional civil rights as an alleged herein. All of these rights are secured by the

First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. As a result of the

foregoing, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer emotional and emotional and

psychological damages in an amount to be determined by a jury. Because of individual

defendants’ willful and malicious conduct, Plaintiff seeks punitive damages in his individual capacity

to be determined by a jury.

II.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

MUNICIPAL LIABILITIY §§ 1981 & 1983

PORT AUTHORITY

26. All of the allegations in each of the foregoing paragraphs are incorporated by

reference as if fully set forth herein.

27. Upon information and belief, Port Authority has a policy, custom, practice and

usage of discriminating against Hispanics, women and other minorities in the workplace. Port

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 8 of 11 PageID: 8
9

Authority, for example, disproportionately punishes women and minorities more harshly than

white officers for committing the same or worse offenses.

28. Upon information and belief, Port Authority further has a policy, custom, practice

and usage of retaliating against police officers who engage in statutory and constitutionally

protected activities such whistleblowing or complaining of unlawful employment practices in

Port Authority.

29. Port Authority knew or should have known of a history of such misconduct but

failed to take remedial action to stop it. At all times relevant as alleged in this Complaint,

individual defendants were acting pursuant to the aforementioned policy, practice, custom, and

usage of Port Authority.

30. Acting under the color of law, by and through the policy-makers of Port

Authority, and pursuant to that official policy or custom and practice, Port Authority

intentionally, knowingly, or with deliberate indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff failed to

train, instruct, supervise, control and/or discipline the individual defendants and others in the

performance of their duties.

31. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff’s constitutional rights were violated, the

Plaintiff has been made to suffer great anxiety, humiliation, embarrassment and other related

injuries that the Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer in an amount to be determined

by a jury.

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 9 of 11 PageID: 9
10

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays that this Court enter an order finding as follows:

(a) That a declaratory judgment be issued that the Plaintiff’s rights have been violated as

alleged above;

(b) that Defendants violated Plaintiff’s civil rights;

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 10 of 11 PageID: 10
11

(c) that the Plaintiffs recover from the individual Defendants, jointly and

severally, compensatory damages, exemplary and punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and

such other monetary relief as may be deemed appropriate in amounts to be determined at

trial;

(d) that the Plaintiffs recover from the Defendants, jointly and severally,

prejudgment interest to the maximum extent permitted by law;

(f) and that the Court grant such other and further relief as it deems just and

proper.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Plaintiffs request a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

DATED: July 25, 2011

By: /S/LOUIS A. ZAYAS, ESQ.________

LOUIS A. ZAYAS, Esq. (LZ-1881)

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 11 of 11 PageID: 11