Medal Day Book 2006.Qxp
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Plaintiff's Reply
Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM Document 174 Filed 06/25/2008 Page 1 of 38 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------X UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, -and- THE VULCAN SOCIETY, INC., ET AL, Civ. Action No. 07-CV-2067 (NGG)(RLM) Plaintiffs-Intervenors, ECF Case -against- Served June 25, 2008 THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL, Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------X MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS-INTERVENORS’ MOTION FOR THE CERTIFICATION OF A CLASS AND IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS-INTERVENORS’ MOTION TO AMEND AND SUPPLEMENT THE COMPLAINT SCOTT + SCOTT, LLP LEVY RATNER, P.C. 29 West 57th Street 80 Eighth Avenue, 8th Floor New York, NY 10019 New York, NY 10011 (212) 223-6444 (212) 627-8100 (212) 223-6334 (fax) (212) 627-8182 (fax) CENTER FOR Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Intervenors CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10012-2399 (212) 614-6438 (212) 614-6499 (fax) On the brief: Richard A. Levy Dana Lossia Judy Scolnick Darius Charney 56-001-00001 15512.DOC Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM Document 174 Filed 06/25/2008 Page 2 of 38 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .................................................................................................1 POINT I. Unlawful Employment Practices Uncovered During the Course of Discovery Are Properly Adjudicated In This Case ................................................2 A. The Employment Practices Being Challenged..................................................................2 B. The Challenged Practices Were Part of The EEOC Charges, And Have Been The Subject of Discovery In This Case...................................................5 C. The Challenge to Exam 6019 Should Be Included In This Action And Those Injured by Exam 6019 Are Proper Members of the Proposed Class..............10 POINT II. -
CCR AR 2014.Pdf
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights move- ments in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization commit- ted to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change. Design: Nicholas Coster, [email protected]. Photo credits: p 2: Yanick Salazar • p 4: Pam Bradshaw • p 6: Pam Bradshaw • p 7: Juan Manuel, Herrera/OAS • p 11: Qa’id Jacobs • p 12: Qa’id Jacobs • p 14: Alexis Agathocleous • p.15: Snowden: Laura Poitras/Praxis Films. Assange: Cancillería del Ecuador. Manning: courtesy of www.bradleymanning.org • p16: © RON- ALD KABUUBI/epa/Corbis • p.19: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance • p.20-21: Picture 2: Laura Raymond. Picture 5: Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq. Pictures 6, 11, 15: Pam Bradshaw. Picture 10: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance. Picture 12: Aliya Hana Hussain • p 22-23: Pictures 2, 6: Pam Brad- shaw. Pictures 4, 5: Sameer A. Khan • p 23: Pictures 4, 5 by Sameer Khan • p 27: Pam Bradshaw • p 29: David Hicks: Adam Thomas (devdsp@flickr) • p 30: Top left: Shayana Kadidal • p.32: Chelsea Manning by Alicia Neal, in cooperation with Chelsea herself, commissioned by the Chelsea Manning Support Network • p 33: Top: Pam Bradshaw. Bottom: Kevin Gay • p 34: Bot- tom left: Alexis Agathocleous • p 36: Bram Cymet (bcymet@flickr) • p 41: Bottom: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance • p 46: Douglas Gorenstein • p 62: Ruby Dee: Courtesy of MDCarchives The Center for Constitutional Rights is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. -
Case 1:17-Cv-09447-JPO Document 55 Filed 04/25/19 Page 1 of 74
Case 1:17-cv-09447-JPO Document 55 Filed 04/25/19 Page 1 of 74 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANNETTE RICHARDSON, ) DEBORAH BOWMAN, ) DEBRA POE, ) DINO RIOJAS, ) STEPHANIE THOMAS, ) BRENDA McKIVER, ) JON WATSON, and ) ERICA RICHARDSON ) ) On behalf of themselves and all others ) similarly situated, ) Civil No. 17-CV-9447 (JPO) ) Plaintiffs, ) AMENDED COMPLAINT ) v. ) CLASS ACTION ) CITY OF NEW YORK, ) ) Defendant. ) ) I. INTRODUCTION 1. For well over a century, the Fire Department of New York (the “FDNY”) has engaged in a pattern or practice of systemic, continuous, and intentional discrimination against African American non-uniformed (“Civilian”) employees and job applicants in hiring, advancement, and compensation decisions. For about 100 years after the Civil War, white men, primarily of Irish and Italian descent, controlled the FDNY at all levels, from upper management to staff. Token integration began during the civil rights movement of the 1960s, but African Americans remained severely underrepresented at all levels of the agency and in all types of jobs. Case 1:17-cv-09447-JPO Document 55 Filed 04/25/19 Page 2 of 74 2. As a result of the broad pattern of racial discrimination, the percentage of African American employees in FDNY as a whole is far less than in other agencies of the New York City government, the percentage of African American employees in higher paying Civilian jobs in FDNY is far less than in lower compensated jobs, and African American Civilian employees are paid lower salaries or wages than white employees in the same job positions in the more highly compensated job categories. -
Case 1:17-Cv-09447-JPO Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 59
Case 1:17-cv-09447-JPO Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 59 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANNETTE RICHARDSON, ) DEBORAH BOWMAN, ) LIZA HORSLEY, ) DEBRA POE ) DINO RIOJAS, ) ARLENE SIMMONS, and ) STEPHANIE THOMAS ) ) On behalf of themselves and all others ) similarly situated, ) Civil No. _____________ ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) CLASS ACTION ) CITY OF NEW YORK, ) ) Defendant. ) ) I. INTRODUCTION 1. For well over a century, the Fire Department of New York (the “FDNY”) has engaged in a pattern or practice of systemic, continuous, and intentional discrimination against African American emergency medical services (“EMS”) and non-uniformed (“Civilian”) employees and job applicants in hiring, placement, advancement, and compensation decisions. For about 100 years after the Civil War, white men, primarily of Irish and Italian descent, controlled the FDNY at all levels, from upper management to staff. Token integration began during the civil rights movement of the 1960s, but African Americans remained severely underrepresented at all levels of the agency and in all types of jobs. 2. As a result of the broad pattern of racial discrimination, the percentage of African American employees in FDNY as a whole is far less than in other agencies of the New York City government, the percentage of African American employees in higher paying EMS and Civilian Case 1:17-cv-09447-JPO Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 2 of 59 jobs in FDNY is far less than in lower compensated jobs, and African American Civilian employees are paid lower salaries or wages than white employees in the same job positions. -
5Oth Anniversary Edition |October 2020
IABPFF “SMOKE" VOLUME 2 |5OTH ANNIVERSARY EDITION |OCTOBER 2020 MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS: The Membership of the lABPFF is comprised of 90 Chapters and represents 5100 fire service personnel and a 200 Lifetime Members. 1 ORGANIZED: Organized Table of Content in Hartford, Connecticut, Words from the President October 3, 1970. Tribute to a Black Fireman (p.2) Inception of the IABPFF (p.3-5) From the Archives (p.6) History of the IABPFF (p.7-13) IABPFF Presidents (p.14) Member Spotlight (p.15) FOUNDING ORGANIZATIONS: Capt. David James Floyd (p.16-17) Vulcan Society Inc., Through the Eyes of a Black Woman (p.18-19) New York, N.Y., Phoenix Society Inc., Health and Wellness (p.20) Hartford, Connecticut, Vulcan Pioneers of New Jersey Inc., Call to Action (p.21) Newark, N.J., Vulcan Pioneers of Hudson County Inc., Election 2020 (p.22-23) Jersey City, N.J., Valiants Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. VOLUME 2 | 50TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION | IABPFF SMOKE 2 IABPFF “SMOKE” 50th Commemorative Edition We are thrilled to celebrate IABPFF's Semicentennial! Our organization is rooted in its rich history and strong fraternal foundation. Dr. King once said "We are not makers of history; we are made by history" so this newsletter honors those who paved the way and reminds us to never forget how far we have come. In these uncertain times, it is clear that our work is not done. The IABPFF will continue the work of our founders and strive to make every new day better than the last.” Carrie Edwards-Clemons, President VOLUME 2 | 50TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION | IABPFF SMOKE 3 Inception of the IABPFF My introduction to how the IABPFF first Just remember the year before in 1968 Dr. -
United States and Vulcan Society V. City of New York City
11-5113 (L) No. 12-491 (XAP) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT __________________ VULCAN SOCIETY, CANDIDO NUNEZ, ROGER GREGG, MARCUS HAYWOOD, Appellees / Cross-Appellants UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee v. MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, MAYOR, NEW YORK FIRE COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS SCOPPETTA, in their individual and official capacities, CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellants / Cross-Appellees __________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _________________ BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS APPELLEE _________________ THOMAS E. PEREZ Assistant Attorney General DENNIS J. DIMSEY LISA J. STARK HOLLY A. THOMAS Attorneys Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Appellate Section Ben Franklin Station P.O. Box 14403 Washington, DC 20044-4403 (202) 514-4491 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION..........................................................................1 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES...............................................................................3 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ..................................................................................3 A. Overview................................................................................................3 B. Factual Background..............................................................................6 C. Procedural History..............................................................................11 1. Disparate Impact Liability And Relief ......................................11 2. Disparate -
Guantánamo Still Matters
Winter 2011 CCR and SNAP Charge Vatican Officials With Crimes Against Humanity In the early 80s, in California, Rita was planning to become a nun. But at just 16, she began to be sexually molested by her parish priest, Father Santiago Tamayo. It began with inappropriate touching in the confessional booth, and escalated over two years to Tamayo, and a second priest, coercing sex. Rita was then “introduced” to six other priests and coerced into sex with each of them as often as once a week. Unsurprisingly, Rita soon became pregnant. Father Tamayo urged her to get an abortion but unable to bring herself to that decision, he (with the assistance (financial and otherwise) of the Church and Diocese) arranged for her to be sent to the Philippines under the auspices of a “scholarship” and Survivors and allies spread the word about the ICC filing during European tour. threatened her into silence. While there, at Father Tamayo’s brother’s clinic, Rita attempted to bring a civil case, but Archdiocese had been paying him to Rita was neglected and malnourished church officials insisted they did not remain in the Philippines for years falling into a coma and eventually know the whereabouts of the priests. after the baby was born. Tamayo also giving birth to her daughter in that The case was ultimately dismissed on produced letters which showed that state. Fortunately, Rita’s mother statute of limitations grounds. In March he was being paid by the Diocese discovered her whereabouts and that 1991, Tamayo returned to California and urged to keep that fact secret. -
Rankin & Taylor
Case 1:08-cv-01034-AT-HBP Document 547 Filed 04/20/17 Page 1 of 1 Rankin & Taylor Attorneys at Law __________________________________________________________________________ 11 Park Place, Suite 914 [email protected] New York, New York 10007 Phone: 212-226-4507 Fax: 212-658-9480 VIA ECF ONLY April 20, 2017 The Honorable Analisa Torres United States District Judge United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007-1312 Re: Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al., 08-CV-1034 (AT) Ligon, et al. v. City of New York, et al., 12-CV-2274 (AT) Davis, et al. v. City of New York, et al., 10-CV-0699 (AT) Your Honor: I am member of Rankin & Taylor, PLLC and counsel to Communities United for Police Reform (“CPR”), proposed amici curiae in the above-referenced matters. CPR is a non-partisan campaign with close to 70 formal members which are nonprofit and community-based organizations from across New York City. CPR is a named community stakeholder in the remedial process in Floyd et al. v. City of New York. In such capacity CPR has been engaged in the remedial process since its inception. In support of the Floyd plaintiffs’ objections to the Monitor’s April 11, 2017 Memorandum to the Court regarding the Approval of Body-Worn Camera Policies, they respectfully request permission to file the attached amius curiae statement. As Your Honor knows, “[f]ederal courts have discretion to permit participation of amici where such participation will not prejudice any party and may be of assistance to the court.” Strougo v. -
United States of America and the Vulcan Society V. City of New York
Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM Document 343 Filed 10/30/09 Page 1 of 70 PageID #: 10775 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------)( UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, -and- THE VULCAN SOCIETY, INC., ET AL, Civil Action No. 07-CV-2067 (NGG)(RLM) Plaintiffs-Intervenors, ECF Case -against- THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL, Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------)( MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND IN OPPOSITION TO INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR QUALIFIED IMMUNITY CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS LEVY RATNER, P.C. 666 Broadway, i h Floor 80 Eighth Avenue, 8th Floor New York, New York 10012-2399 New York, New York 10011-5126 (212) 614-6475 (212) 627-8100 (212) 614-6499 (fax) (212) 627-8182 (fax) On the Brief: Richard A. Levy Dana E. Lossia Robert H. Stroup Anjana Samant Date of Service: October 30, 2009 {56-00 1-0000 1-09035361} Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM Document 343 Filed 10/30/09 Page 2 of 70 PageID #: 10776 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 2 FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE ............................................................................................................ 3 RULE 56 STANDARDS ............................................................................................................... -
1 EEOC Charge--Vulcan Society Inc. of NYFD V. Fire Department of New
EEOC Charge--Vulcan Society Inc. of NYFD v. Fire Department of New York August 9, 2002 PARTIES The Vulcan Society Inc. is a fraternal organization of the New York City Fire Department (“NYFD”), whose purpose is to promote the interests, social and cultural affairs of Black and African American firefighters. The Vulcan Society Inc. represents Black and African American firefighters in the NYFD. They also represent the Black and African American people in the area who, but for the policies, practices and intentional acts of the New York City Fire Department, would apply for and succeed in being hired as firefighters in New York City. The New York City Fire Department is the New York City Department charged with protecting the lives and property of the people of New York City through prevention, education, fire suppression, medical services and other related emergency and non-emergency activities. The New York City Fire Department is part of the City of New York. The New York City Fire Department employs approximately 12,000 firefighters, as well as many civilian employees. FACTS Of the 12,000 New York City Fire Department firefighters, only 2.87% (approximately 300 individuals) are Black or African-American. This is too great a disparity to be the result of chance. The other races represented in the NYFD are represented in the following percentages: White ................................... 92.11% Hispanic ............................... 4.42% Asian/Pacific Islander .......... 0.33% Other .................................... 0.27% The hiring process from the last few lists of the New York City Fire Department is as follows: A written application A written test, which results in a score A physical test, which results in a score 1 (The written test score and the physical test score are combined with possible military, residency and legacy points, resulting in a score which determines where the candidate will be placed on the list. -
RLM Document 294 Filed 07/22/09 Page 1 of 93
Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG -RLM Document 294 Filed 07/22/09 Page 1 of 93 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------X UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MEMORANDUM & ORDER Plaintiff, 07-cv-2067 (NGG)(RLM) -and- THE VULCAN SOCIETY, INC., MARCUS HAYWOOD, CANDIDO NUÑEZ, ROGER GREGG, Plaintiff-Intervenors, -against- THE CITY OF NEW YORK, FIRE DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF CITYWIDE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, and MAYOR MICHAEL BLOOMBERG and NEW YORK CITY FIRE COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS SCOPPETTA, in their individual and official capacities, Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------X NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS, United States District Judge. From 1999 to 2007, the New York City Fire Department used written examinations with discriminatory effects and little relationship to the job of a firefighter to select more than 5,300 candidates for admission to the New York City Fire Academy. These examinations unfairly excluded hundreds of qualified people of color from the opportunity to serve as New York City firefighters. Today, the court holds that New York City’s reliance on these examinations constitutes employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 1 Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG -RLM Document 294 Filed 07/22/09 Page 2 of 93 I. INTRODUCTION In recent years, black and Hispanic residents of New York City (the “City”) have come to comprise a substantial portion of the City’s population, but their representation -
United States of America and the Vulcan Society V. City of New York
Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM Document 596 Filed 12/09/10 Page 1 of 40 PageID #: 16671 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, CIV. ACTION No. 07-cv-2067 -AND- (NGG)(RLM) THE VULCAN SOCIETY, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-INTERVENORS, V. CITY OF NEW YORK, DEFENDANT. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS INTERVENORS' PROPOSED ORDER FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND SERVICE AWARDS TO CLASS REPRESENTATIVES CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS LEVY RATNER, P.C. 666 Broadway, 7th Floor 80 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10012 New York, NY 10011 (212) 614-6464 (212) 627-8100 (212) 614-6499 (fax) (212) 627-8182 (fax) SCOTT & SCOTT, LLP 500 Fifth Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10110 (212) 223-6444 (212) 223-6334 (fax) On the Brief: Richard A. Levy Dana Lossia Darius Charney Anjana Samant Date of Service: September 29,2010 . {56-001-0000 1-1 0036930} Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM Document 596 Filed 12/09/10 Page 2 of 40 PageID #: 16672 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 FACTS ............................................................................................................................................ 2 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................. 3 POINT I. THE COURT HAS BROAD AUTHORITY TO ORDER THE PROPOSED INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ..................................................................................................................