On Friday (July 12), U.S. District Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall dismissed a New York state trooper’s retaliation claim portion of a lawsuit against former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo while keeping the sexual harassment claim against him untouched. The basis of her ruling was that the alleged retaliatory action had occurred after her employment contract had ended.
Trooper 1’s retaliation claims centered on a reported threat by Cuomo in February 2022 to seek "criminal prosecution of his victims." However, Judge Hall stated that this threat, if it occurred, would have happened after Cuomo had resigned from office.
“His resignation presumably ended any employment relationship Cuomo may have had with plaintiff,” Hall wrote in her decision. “In other words, even taking plaintiff’s allegation as true, Cuomo’s employment relationship with plaintiff ceased about six months prior to Cuomo’s alleged February 10, 2022 threat.”
The plaintiff, identified only as "Trooper 1," had sued Cuomo and his top aides in 2022 for gender discrimination and retaliation. She alleged that Cuomo engaged in inappropriate conversations and physically groped her while she was part of his protective security detail. These allegations were prominently featured in Attorney General Letitia James' August 2021 report, which eventually led to Cuomo's resignation.
In her complaint, the plaintiff also named two of Cuomo’s top aides — Melissa DeRosa and Rich Azzopardi. They were dismissed from the case last year. Judge Hall ruled that the plaintiff had failed to establish valid discrimination and retaliation claims against them.
Trooper 1 contended that DeRosa, who served as Cuomo’s chief of staff, helped cover up incidents of harassment, including allegedly intimidating a newspaper editor who questioned Trooper 1’s transfer to Cuomo’s protective detail. However, Hall said that the plaintiff failed to prove that DeRosa witnessed any firsthand conduct or was informed about any harassment.
“Plaintiff contends that knowledge of Cuomo’s alleged harassment can be imputed onto DeRosa by virtue of her position,” Hall stated. “Plaintiff asks the court to assume too much."
Regarding the retaliation claim against DeRosa, Hall noted that there was no employment relationship between DeRosa and the plaintiff since DeRosa was employed by the governor’s office while the plaintiff was an officer with the New York State Police.
“The question is not whether DeRosa was a state employee at the time of the harassment, but rather whether there was an employment relationship between plaintiff and DeRosa at the time of the retaliation,” Hall said. “There was not.”
Azzopardi, Cuomo’s then-spokesperson, was accused by the plaintiff of tweeting that she and her attorneys were attempting to "extort" a settlement for "cheap cash." Judge Hall dismissed this claim, similarly stating that there was no employment relationship between Azzopardi and Trooper 1.
“Trooper 1’s complaint was a gross abuse of the court system and a transparent attempt to weaponize the Attorney General’s sham report for her own financial gain. These efforts have failed,” DeRosa and Azzopardi said in a joint statement on Friday. “We believe that Judge Hall’s opinion demonstrates that Trooper 1’s claims were frivolous and, as such, we are considering our legal options.”
Cuomo's attorney, Rita Glavin, criticized the plaintiff's complaint and the Attorney General's report. “While politics and a reckless media mob carried the day in 2021, truth and the rule of law will ultimately prevail,” Glavin said in a statement. “We look forward to the public seeing what we’ve learned through discovery and to prevailing in court.”
