Levine et al v. Patterson et al

Filing 32

JUDGMENT: in favor of New York State Department of Audit and Control, New York State Division of Budget, Office of the State Comptroller, State of New York, David A. Patterson, Laura Anglin, Robert L. Megna, Thomas P. DiNapoli against The Organizatio n of New York State Management Confidential Employees, Andrew Niven, Annette Grant, Annette Tombolillo, Arthur Breen, Brian Levine, Chris Covert, Constance Graves, Daniel Osborne, Gregory Brown, John Barnett, John Stellar, Joseph Sano, Kathryn Jamison, Kimberly Vile, Linda Shaw, Michael Resnick, Mickey Massiano, Nancy Ferrante, Patricia Chichester, Robert Godley, Robin Taylor, Rosemary Sawyer, Sarah Washington, Shelley Dross, Thomas Sloan, William Lightbody, William McCartney. (jmb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
Brian Levine, John Barnett, Arthur Breen, Gregory Brown, Patricia Chichester,
Chris Covert, Shelley Dross, Nancy Ferrante, Robert Godley, Annette Grant,
Constance Graves, Kathryn Jamison, William Lightbody, Mickey Massiano,
William McCartney, Andrew Niven, Daniel Osborne, Michael Resnick, Rosemary
Sawyer, Linda Shaw, Thomas Sloan, John Stellar, Robin Taylor, Annette
Tombolillo, Kimberly Vile, Sarah Washington, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, and the Organization of New York State Management
Confidential Employees (OMCE) on behalf of its members and by its Executive
Director, Joseph Sano
Plaintiffs
vs.

CASE NUMBER: 1:10-CV-1007 (NAM/DRH)

David A. Paterson, Individually and as Governor or the State of New York,
Thomas P. Dinapoli, Individually and as Comptroller of the State of New York,
Robert L. Megna, Individually and as Budget Director of the Division of Budget,
Laura L. Anglin, Individually and as the former Budget Director for the Division of
Budget, Office of the State Comptroller, New York State Department of Audit and
Control and the State of New York
Defendants
Decision by Court. This action came to hearing before the Court.
The issues have been heard and a decision has been rendered.
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED
That defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, plaintiff’s state law claims are
DISMISSED. The Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and judgment is
entered in favor of the defendants.
All of the above pursuant to the order of the Honorable Judge Norman A. Mordue, dated
the 30th day of September, 2011.

DATED: September 30, 2011

s/
Joanne Bleskoski
Deputy Clerk