Preview
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg lofi Trans ID: LCV20232428031
v
ary
&yd David R. Castellani (W/ and PA Bar) *
Bavid@Castellanilaw.com
*Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney
CASTELLANI
LAW FIRM David C. Castellani (Mw/ Bar)
Connor @Castellanilaw.com
450 Tilton Road, Suite 245
Northfield, New Jersey 08225 Caroline S. Castellani (1 8ar)
Tel: 609-641-2288 Fax: 609-641-2299 Carctine@ Castellanilaw.com
Tax ID No: 20-3743893
August 24, 2023
Honorable James H. Pickering, Jr., J.S.C.
Superior Court of New Jersey — Cape May County
9 North main Street, 2" Floor
Cape May Court House, NJ 08210
Re: Audrey Kernan v. State of New Jersey; et al.
Docket No.: CPM-L-238-22
Dear Judge Pickering:
I am writing to request that Your Honor enter an Amended Order permitting Plaintiff to
file her Second Amended Complaint by August 25, 2023. I did not see the paragraph in the Order
requiring the Amended Complaint be filed by August 15, 2023.
Also, the Defendant Palumbo was recently dismissed for lack of prosecution under R. 1:13-
Jam enclosing a form of Order under the 5-day Rule for Your Honor’s signature allowing
Plaintiff to file her Second Amended Complaint by Friday, August 25, 2023, and reinstate
Defendant Palumbo. I have consent of all counsel.
y
Respectfully suf Au
CAS’ p Bk I
DAVID R STED) ANI
DRC/dh
Encl.
ce: james.duttera@law.njoag.gov (w/encl.) (Via eCourts)
way(@archerlaw.com (w/encl.) (Via eCourts)
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
Dayid Castellani, Esq. #023691991
Castellani Law Firm, LLC
450 Tilton Road, Suite 245
Northfield, NJ 08225-1259
(609) 641-2288
Attorneys for Plaintiff
AUDREY KERNAN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: CAPE MAY COUNTY
Plaintiff, DOCKET NO. CPM-L-238-22
Y¥. CIVIL ACTION
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, NEW JERSEY ORDER
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ROBERT
ASARO-ANGELO, TENNILLE McCOY,
INGRID FRENCH, CARMINE
TAGLIALATELLA, DAISY DoNATI
PALUMBO, STEPHANIE MINGIN, and
JOHN DOES 1-S AND JANE ROES 1-5;
individually, and in their official capacity,
THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court on application of David R. Castellani
appearing on behalf of Plaintiff for an Order permitting Plaintiff to file the Second Amended
Complaint, and the Court having considered the moving papers and for good cause shown,
It is on this day of , 2023, ORDERED that plaintiff may file her
Second Amended Complaint; and
(1) ITIS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall file her amended Complaint on or
before August 25, 2023;
(2) ITIS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint against Defendant Daisy
DoNati Palumbo be and is hereby reinstated; and,
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
(3) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of the within Order shall be served upon
all parties within five (5) days.
James H. Pickering, Jr., J.S.C.
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pglof42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
David Castellani, Esq. #023691991
Castellani Law Firm, LLC
450 Tilton Road, Suite 245
Northfield, NJ 08225-1259
(609) 641-2288
Attorneys for Plaintiff
AUDREY KERNAN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: CAPE MAY COUNTY
Plaintiff, DOCKET NO. CPM-L-238-22
v. CIVIL ACTION
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, NEW JERSEY SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ROBERT AND JURY DEMAND
ASARO-ANGELO, TENNILLE McCOY,
INGRID FRENCH, CARMINE
TAGLIALATELLA, DAISY DoNATI
PALUMBO, STEPHANIE MINGIN, and
JOHN DOES 1-5 AND JANE ROES 1-5;
individually, and in their official capacity,
Plaintiff Audrey Kernan, by and through her attorneys, by way of Complaint against the
Defendants, State of New Jersey, New Jersey Department of Labor (“NJDOL”), Robert Asaro-
Angelo (“Asaro-Angelo”), Tennille McCoy (“McCoy”), Ingrid French (“French”), Carmine
Taglialatella (“Taglialatella”), Daisy Donati Palumbo (“Palumbo”), Stephanie Mingin
(Mingin”), and John Doe and Jane Roe 1-5 (said names being fictitious), individually and in
their official capacities, (collectively “Defendants”) hereby alleges as follows:
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg2of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
PARTIES AND VENUE
1 Plaintiff Audrey Kernan (“Kerman”) is a resident of Ocean City, Cape May
County, State of New Jersey. Plaintiff has been an employee of the State of New Jersey for over
twenty years, serving as a Supervisory Workers Compensation Judge.
2 Defendant NIDOL, with headquarters in Trenton, New Jersey, is a branch of the
Defendant State of New Jersey government and is responsible for formulating and managing the
state’s labor infrastructure by providing statewide services to state and local government
agencies as well as the citizens of New Jersey. Defendant State of New Jersey and Defendant
NJDOL were Plaintiffs employer at all times herein.
3 Upon information and belief, defendant Robert Asaro-Angelo is and was at all
relevant times hereto employed as the Commissioner of the NIDOL.
4 Upon information and belief, defendant Tennille McCoy is and was at all relevant
times hereto employed as an Assistant Commissioner of the NJDOL.
5 Upon information and belief, defendant Ingrid French is and was at all relevant
times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “Workers Compensation Judge” and/or
“Administrative Supervising Judge.”
6 Upon information and belief, defendant Carmine Taglialatella is and was at all
relevant times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “Workers Compensation Judge” and/or
“Administrative Supervising Judge.”
7 Upon information and belief, defendant Daisy Donati Palumbo is and was at all
relevant times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “clerk” and/or “office technician.”
8 Upon information and belief, defendant Stephanie Mingin was at all relevant
times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “clerk” and/or an “office technician.”
2
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg3of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
9 Cape May County is the appropriate venue in this matter under R. 4:3-2.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS
10. In or about November 2001, Plaintiff was nominated to be a Judge of Workers
Compensation for the State of New Jersey Department of Labor by Senator James S. Caficro
from Cape May County. Prior to that she worked for the state for several years as a
Commissioner on the State Commission of Investigation (SCI).
11, In or about December 2001, Plaintiff was appointed by then Governor of New
Jersey Donald T. DiFrancesco to serve as a “Judge” of Workers Compensation for the NIDOL.
12. In or around late January 2002, Plaintiff accepted the appointment, closed her
successful law practice, and was sworn in as a “Judge” of Workers Compensation working under
Defendant NJDOL.
13. In or about September 2009, in recognition of her stellar work, Plaintiff was
notified that she had been elevated to “Administrative Supervisory Judge” which started on or
about September 30, 2009.
14, In or about 2017, Plaintiff was once again promoted, this time to “Supervisory
Judge” in Atlantic City. The Director of the NJDOL noted Plaintiff’s work effort, diligence and
excellent work record and ratings in promoting her.
15, For the majority of Plaintiff's employment from 2002 through 2022, Plaintiff
served in the Cape May — Atlantic City vicinage.
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg4of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
Defendants’ Discriminatory Acts, Fraudulent Acts, Coercive Conduct and Other Unethical
Behaviors,
16. Over the years of working for the NIDOL, Plaintiff has been referred to as “Black
lover,” “wily woman,” “witch,” “playing for the wrong team,” “goody two shoes,” a “nerd”,
“weird, “queer”, and even the “white devil” — by other New Jersey Workers’ Compensation
judges, supervisors and/or administrative Dept of Labor employees.
17. Over the years of working for the NJDOL, Plaintiff denied repeated requests by a
former Chief Judge to change verdicts, alter lists inappropriately and/or other deviant improper
state actions amongst other request such as accepted unearned or non-reimbursable mileage
vouchers, etc.
18. In or about January 2018, Plaintiff was informed by way of a reporting of another
that defendant Judge of Compensation Carmine Taglialatella had created and was engaged in an
impermissible ethical conflict of interest by serving as a member of the Board of Trustees of
Shore Medical Center located in Somers Point, New Jersey while simultaneously sitting as a
Judge of Compensation, along with other violations.
19. Plaintiff informed the Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation Ashley
Hutchinson, Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation Art Marchand, Chief Judge and
Director of Workers Compensation Russell Wojtenko and/or a supervisor whom she was to
report of this conflict of interest, which she reasonably believed maybe a violation of the rules
along with other Cannon of Ethics and Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys and/or judges
or judges in Worker’s Compensation Court. The reporting party certainly believed so.
20. Upon information and belief, shortly after Plaintiff reported the wrongful
conduct, Judge Taglialatella began orchestrating a severe, pervasive pattern of harassment
against Plaintiff in retaliation for Plaintiff's report. Further he continued his other wrongdoings
4
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg5of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
in appearances allowed by friends and those he referred to as his “family” amongst other
violations.
al. In or about June 2018, Plaintiff reported to Chief Judge and Director Wojtenko
her reasonable belief that defendant Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation Ingrid
French had improperly submitted requests for mileage expense reimbursement over the course of
several years, thereby engaging in theft, falsifying public records and fraud, including wire and
mail fraud and/or engaging in illegal, illicit and/or unethical conduct. The Chief Judge and/or
others in the department of Labor later told Plaintiff that she may have stolen as much as $38,000
in fake mileage vouchers, Further, that the Department of Labor was aware of it but was
protecting French via Defendant Assistant Commissioner Tennille McCoy and/or the
Commissioner of Labor Robert Asaro-Angelo.
22. Specifically, the NJDOL reassigned Judges to different home venues, which were
farther from their actual homes, used the different address for mailing purposes, and incentivized
the change in venue through mileage reimbursement kickbacks. Defendant French was well
aware at the time of one assignment of a home vicinage to Atlantic City that she was not entitled
to reimbursed mileage nor was she entitled to take those monies without paying state and/or
federal taxes,
23. Upon information and belief, shortly after Plaintiff reported the aforementioned
wrongful conduct, Judge French began orchestrating a severe or pervasive pattern of harassment
against Plaintiff in retaliation for her report.
24, In or about April 2018, Plaintiff reported to Chief Judge and Director Wojtenko
her reasonable belief that Defendant Clerk Daisy Donati Palumbo was claiming to have had sex
with at least one of the attorneys who appeared before the Workers Compensation Court in
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg6of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
Atlantic City while simultancously handling cases brought by that attorney, which Plaintiff
reasonably believed was an ethical and/or other conflict. Furthermore, at the direction of
Taglialatella and/or others Daisy Donati Palumbo was furthering frauds by re-arranging case lists
to benefit certain insurance carriers and “friends/family” of Taglialatella, amongst other ethical
and/or other conflicts.
25. Upon information and belief, shortly after Plaintiff reported the wrongful conduct,
defendant Palumbo began orchestrating a severe and pervasive pattern of harassment against
Plaintiff in retaliation for her report.
26. Thereafter, upon information and belief, defendants Palumbo and Mingin engaged
in a continuous pattern of harassment of Plaintiff at the direction of and/or to gain favor with the
individual Judge Defendants by stalking Plaintiff and reporting back to the other individual
Defendants. Including but not limited to, for example, Defendant Mingin laying on the floor at
the base of Plaintiff's office door to attempt to hear and see Plaintiff in an effort to report any
conduct of Plaintiff to the other Defendants,
27. For all relevant times hereto, Palumbo continually harassed Plaintiff through the
filing of false claims against Plaintiff (which were found to have no merit), repeatedly calling her
chambers and hanging up, and even admitting that she was “messing with [Judge Kerman].”
28, Upon information and belief, Defendants Palumbo and Mingin harassed Plaintiff
by filing knowingly false claims against Plaintiff either at the direction of and/or to gain favor
with the individual judge defendants and the other defendants. Defendant Mingin also engaged
in a pattern of altering case lists and “covering” for another judge who was absent afternoons in
the workplace.
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg7of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
29, Upon information and belief, in 2018, and 2019, the individual defendants filed
numerous false and wrongful claims against Plaintiff in concert with each other and/or other
individual defendants with the intention of covering up their wrongful, fraudulent acts and
ultimately harming Plaintiff in an effort to remove her from her position for not “playing along.”
30. The individual defendants filed false claims against Plaintiff in retaliation against
Plaintiff for her reports of wrongdoings of other New Jersey Workers Compensation Judges and
not “playing along” with the ongoing tax fraud, mail fraud and other unethical conduct being
committed and permitted by the Defendants, Many of these actions were harmful to the public
and working citizens and employees of the State of New Jersey.
31. Upon information and belief, Defendants treated Plaintiff differently and/or in a
disparate manner than they have treated and/or would have treated Plaintiff if she was a male.
32. Upon information and belief, Defendants treated Plaintiff differently and/or in a
disparate manner than they have treated and/or would have treated Plaintiff if her sexual
orientation and/or affections or perception of the same were not of the possibility of being
“queer.”
33. Upon information and belief, Defendants would not have retaliated against
Plaintiff for her reports and/or disclosures if Plaintiff was a male.
34. Upon information and belief, Defendants would not have retaliated against
Plaintiff for her reports and/or disclosures if Plaintiffs sexual orientation and/or affections
and/or perception of the same were not of Plaintiff being “queer.”
35, Plaintiff was forced to defend numerous false charges that had no factual and/or
legal basis in reality but were brought with the intent to harass and intimidate the Plaintiff into
‘playing along” with the numerous fraudulent activities and unethical violations that were
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 8of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
occurring, The upper management, including Defendant Asaro-Angelo, were well aware of the
falsities and/or unlikeliness of truth and/or Defendants condoned this activity.
36. By issuance of various separate letters during this time period to Plaintiff, all
complaints against Plaintiff were found to be unsubstantiated and without merit and dismissed.
37. On or about May 14, 2019, Defendant Palumbo again falsely charged Plaintiff
with a bogus claim, this time alleging that Plaintiff was “screaming and yelling.” Once again, an
investigation proved allegations against Plaintiff had no merit. However, the DOL backed up
Plaintiff without themselves in any way legitimately investigating and/or by quite the opposite,
having condoned her actions and/or plotting with her for said actions.
38. Up to at least July 8, 2021, Plaintiff was continually harassed and retaliated
against by Defendants for reporting wrongful conduct of other judges and staff of the New Jersey
Department of Labor.
39. In or about October 2019, NIDOL Assistant Commissioner Tennille McCoy
wrongfully, knowingly, willingly, and maliciously filed a complaint with the Judiciary
Performance Commission against Plaintiff based on fraudulent statements that had been
previously dismissed by the State of New Jersey EEO, knowing that these claims were
previously determined to be unfounded and dismissed without merit.
40. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Assistant Commissioner McCoy, was
directed and/or manipulated into filing the October 2019 complaint by Defendant NJDOL
employees, including but not limited to the individual Defendants, who wanted Plaintiff removed
from her position and employment with Defendant State of New Jersey for not “playing along”
with their fraudulent activities and other unethical behaviors and in retaliation for her “blowing
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg9of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
the whistle” on wrongful conduct and/or otherwise exercising her right to freedom of speech on
matters of public concern,
Plaintiff's Wrongful Suspension, Subsequent Wrongful Termination, and
Defendants’ Continued, Concerted Coercive and Harassing Behaviors.
41. On or about July 9, 2021, the NIDOL and/or individual Defendants Asaro-Angelo
and McCoy and/or John Does 1-10, wrongfully suspended Plaintiffs employment and had two
or three building and floor guards/officers physically remove Plaintiff from her workplace
without good cause, and for purposes of public humiliation, embarrassment and to destroy and
disparage Plaintiff's reputation both professional and business.
42, At no time did any Defendant serve Plaintiff with formal charges against her.
43, For practical purposes, Defendant NJDOL and/or Defendant State of New Jersey
and the individual Defendants and John Does 1-10 wrongfully denied Plaintiff promotions she
would have otherwise been entitled to and wrongfully suspended Plaintiff for over fourteen
months, without due process.
44. Defendants’ alleged reasoning for its “major discipline” against Plaintiff was
nothing more than a pretext for retaliation and/or discrimination. Furthermore, Supervising Judge
Kernan has been tenured since 2005, and Defendants’ actions are designed, schemed and/or
conspired to circumvent tenure protections.
45. By letter dated June 21, 2022, Plaintiff (through legal counsel) withdrew her
request for a hearing under N.J.A.C. 12:235-10.9 while stating that she would be pursing “all
other avenues including statutory, etc”. This letter did not simultaneously withdraw Plaintiff
from her right to a Constitutional hearing under the New Jersey State Constitution. Nor is that
hearing waivable without proper procedures. The Constitutional hearing must proceed for
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg10of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
removal in public. To date, plaintiff has never received notice of any constitutional hearing, nor
has she ever waived any such hearing.
46. Pursuant to the New Jersey State Constitution, only the Governor may “cause the
removal ...” of a judge of compensation and only after a public hearing and initiation by him
personally.
47. Upon information and belief, in this case the Governor did not knowingly institute
any actions in this matter.
48. The authority to discipline employees under N.J.A.C. is self-contained within the
Defendant Department of Labor and is limited to short-term suspension and does NOT include
REMOVAL.
49. Further, the short-term suspension can only be enforced after the N.LA.C, 12:235-
10.9 hearing- not before. The Defendant Commissioner of Labor and Defendant NJDOL have
proceeded in actions as if they themselves were the “Governor,” in violation of multiple laws,
including the New Jersey State Constitution.
50. Contrary to the language of N.J.A.C. 12:235-10.9, Defendant Asaro-Angelo
excessively suspended Supervising Judge Kernan for approximately 14 months at full pay, which
suspension took effect on July 8, 2021, prior to any Final Hearing at all. Defendant Asaro-
Angelo’s long-term suspension of Plaintiffs employment was ultra vires as a violation of both
N.LA.C. and the New Jersey State Constitution. Indeed, only the Governor can issue a long-term
suspension and/or removal and only after formal charges have been filed and Plaintiff has been
afforded a public hearing.
10
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg1lof42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
51. Upon information and belief, the Commissioner had a “buddy” stamp the
Governor’s name on a removal letter while the Governor was either in Italy and/or when he was
returning home and/or was not in the office.
52. Upon information and belief, the Governor did not sign the “termination Iectter”
personally and/or signed it without full knowledge of the underlying matter and/or without any
affiant. Nor was this stamped letter publicized as required by any executive Order which is
required for removal.
53. At no time was an Executive Order issued by the Governor to remove Plaintiff.
54. Defendant Asaro-Angelo’s wrongful long-term suspension was a public shaming
attempt to disparage Plaintiff, Supervising Judge Kernan defaming her at multiple levels.
55. N.LA.C. does not provide the procedural safeguards afforded in the New Jersey
Constitution before the termination of employment for Judge of Workers Compensation.
Pursuant to the New Jersey Constitution, the Commissioner has no authority to REMOVE (or
long-term suspend) a tenured supervising judge. Any such removals must be handled by public
hearing pursuant to the New Jersey Constitution, Article V, Sec. IV, Par. 5. Further, the
Governor may begin proceedings of REMOVAL only after a recommendation of the
Commissioner. Those proceedings must include a public hearing.
56. Upon information and belief, the Commissioner personally was and continues to
be directly involved in creating and executing a plan to terminate Plaintiffs employment without
following the procedural safeguards afforded to her in the New Jersey Constitution.
57. Even under the most liberal interpretation where the Governor has the ability to
delegate such a duty to one of his subordinates, the Governor has a duty to “take care that the
laws be faithfully executed.” Yurthermore, the delegation could not be to this Commissioner
ul
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg12of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
since he is intrinsically involved with the ongoing fraud and/or because in any case where the
commissioner can assist, it is for judicial violation emanating outside the Department of Labor
such as a conviction in a criminal matter which may cause the investigation by the DOL,
58. Defendant NJDOL is an “agency” to which the Administrative Procedure Act
(“APA”) applies, which means they may not adopt “rules” without first satisfying the notice and
hearing steps of the APA.
59. Notwithstanding the legal requirements set out under the New Jersey State
Constitution to remove a judge of compensation, by letter dated July 25, 2022, a letter apparently
stamped with the signature of Phillip Murphy, as Governor, advised that Plaintiff would be
“removed as a Workers Compensation Judge effective August 12, 2022, in accordance with
NJAC. 12:235-10.9.” As such, Defendants wrongfully terminated Plaintiffs employment,
effective August 12, 2022.
60. The July 25, 2022 letter with the stamp of the signature of Governor Murphy is
ultra vires as a violation of the New Jersey State Constitution requiring formal charges and a
public hearing before any such removal.
él. To the extent that Governor Murphy was aware of this matter, he breached his
duty set forth as Governor of this State to ensure his delegated duty was faithfully carried out
according to the legislative intent.
62. There is not and has never been an Executive Order provided to Plaintiff to
legitimatize this Governor’s actions.
63. Defendants’ actions, including the wrongful termination of Plaintiff's
employment, were in retaliation for Plaintiff reporting what she reasonably believed were
12
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg13o0f42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
violations of the law, illegal, unethical, and/or fraudulent conduct; and also, in retaliation for
Plaintiffs attempt to exercise her New Jersey Constitutional Right to free speech.
64. To continue their pattern of harassing Plaintiff, even after Defendants wrongfully
terminated Plaintiff's employment, after over twenty years of loyal service as a Judge of
Workers Compensation, Defendants wrongfully and maliciously denied Plaintiffs claim for
unemployment benefits, knowing full well that Plaintiff was legally entitled to all such benefits.
Defendant Department of Labor has an obvious conflict regarding Plaintiff and her
unemployment benefits but upon information and belief, did not make any attempt to recuse
itself or put up an ethical barrier from the individually named Defendants.
65. Plaintiff would not have been suspended and/or terminated based on the same
factual allegations if she were a male and/or had a different affectionate or sexual orientation or
perception to the same. In addition, similarly situated Workers Compensation Judges committed
similar if not more severe offenses than Plaintiff, including Defendants Ingrid French and also
Bradley Henson, and did not receive as severe discipline as Plaintiff.
66. Upon information and belief, male New Jersey Workers Compensation Judges,
including but not limited to Workers Compensation Judge Brad Henson (Ret.) whose conduct
was much more egregious than anything Plaintiff was ever accused of were not suspended and/or
terminated based on the same or similar allegations, if not more severe allegations as compared
to Plaintiff.
67. Upon information and belief Defendants’ actions would not have occurred but for
Plaintiff's gender (female) and sexual orientation and/or affections or perception of the same
(“queer”),
13
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg14of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
Continuing Harassment Now by Removal of Plaintiffs Counsel’s Son in Court
68. In or about October 2022, for no legitimate reason other than to continue to harass
Plaintiff and her legal counsel, Defendants disqualified Plaintiff's Counsel’s son, who is a
lawyer, from practicing within the two entire venues of Cape May County and Atlantic City
Workers Compensation Court.
69. Specifically, Plaintiff's Counsel’s son, as an attorney, was disqualified from the
entire venue without being afforded the due process of a conflict hearing beforehand.
70. Upon information and belief this act by Defendants was a continued, concerted
pattern of harassment in further attempts to cover up their wrongful, fraudulent acts and
unethical conduct through disqualifying Plaintiff's Counsel’s son from working in the entire
venue of the Atlantic City Workers Compensation Court.
7, This was a concerted purposeful attempt by Defendants to put a strain on the
attorney-client relationship. Upon information and belief, this Directive came from the
Defendants and/or their deputy attorneys general and/or Chief Judge/Director Maria Del Valle
Koch.
72. This constitutes a concerted effort and continuous and systematic pattern of
harassment to further insulate the wrongdoings of those involved in the fraudulent activities
through intimidation, fabrication, and otherwise wrongful behavior.
73. On or about June 14, 2019, and October 4, 2021, Plaintiff served Defendants with
Notices of Tort Claims pursuant to N.J.S.A. 59:8-1 to -11.
74. Mail fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, and coercing witness testimony are cach
predicate offenses of the New Jersey State RICO statute.
14
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg15of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
75. Mail fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, and coercing witness testimony are each
predicate offenses of the conspiracy to commit RICO violations.
7. Under N.J.S.A, 2C:51-2, if found guilty of the facts as alleged in a Criminal Court
of law, the acts may serve as a basis of forfeiture of public office.
Continuing Harassment by Failure to Settle Plaintiff’s Workers Comp Claims
77. Upon information and belief, in or about beginning in September 2011 and
including claims through July 2020, Defendants have directed that none of Plaintiffs’ personal
workers compensation claims shall be settled and/or processed.
2B. Specifically, Plaintiff's Claims were either fraudulently dismissed and/or remain
unresolved to date.
Irreparable Injury to Plaintiff,
79. Unless the aforementioned conduct of Defendants is enjoined and restrained by
this Court, Plaintiff will suffer substantial and irreparable injury, such injury will include, but is
not limited to:
(a) Injury to goodwill and reputation as a public figure;
(b) Injury to goodwill and reputation as an ethical, practicing attorney in good
standing of the State of New Jersey;
(c) Loss of prospective job opportunities due to injury to goodwill and reputation
as a public figure;
(d) Loss of prospective job opportunities due to injury as an ethical, practicing
attorney in good standing of the State of New Jersey;
15
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg16o0f42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
(e) Loss of prospective business relationship and/or clients due to injury to
goodwill and reputation; and
(f) Severe emotional distress is proximately caused by intentional tortious
activities, including but not limited to intentional fraud and defamation.
80. It is difficult, at this time, for Plaintiff to estimate the amount of prospective
business relationships lost as a result of Defendants’ discriminatory acts, fraudulent acts,
unethical acts, and otherwise wrongful conduct.
81. Plaintiff cannot estimate with any degree of certainty, at this time, the nature and
extent of her actual and potential damages incurred and to be incurred as a direct and proximate
consequence of Defendants’ wrongful conduct. As such, the damages and injuries sustained, as
well as those threatened by reason of the intentional and continuous actions of Defendants are
irreparable and Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law for the interference and damaging
activities of Defendants. Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to protection against further damage to
her goodwill and reputation, of her existing and prospective economic advantages and common
law rights from the tortious, damaging conduct of Defendants.
COUNT ONE
VIOLATION OF RACKETEER INFLUENCED
AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS (RICO)
PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES UNDER
NuJ.S.A. 2C:41-1-2
82, Plaintiff repeats and reasserts ail the allegations set forth in the foregoing
paragraphs as if set forth herein at length.
83. At all relevant times, Plaintiff is a person within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1
through 6.
16
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg17of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
84. At all relevant times, cach Defendant is a person within the meaning of N.LS.A.
2C:41-1 through 6.
85. At all relevant times, each of the RICO Defendants was, and is, a person that
exists separate and distinct from the RICO Enterprise described below.
A. The RICO Enterprise
86. Defendants Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine
Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin, and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1-
5 constitute an association-in-fact enterprise within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1 through 6,
referred to herein as the “Enterprise.”
87. Defendants Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine
Taglialatella, Daisy Dinato Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin, and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1-
5 are a group of persons associated together in fact, for the common purpose of carrying on an
ongoing criminal enterprise. In particular, the Enterprise has a common goal of abusing taxpayer
money and hindering Plaintiff’s Constitutional right to earn income (preventing promotions and
wrongful termination) and damaging her reputation through a sophisticated, coordinated,
sustained, well-orchestrated and multi-year campaign of deceptive conduct, nepotistic hiring
practices, and misuse of State tax revenue to further their own personal and political interests.
They intended to further that objective and exercised substantial discretion in doing so.
88. The Enterprise is ongoing because members of the Enterprise have long-standing
business relationships rooted in the State, common control, ongoing business arrangements, and
a mutual interest in common (criminal) activities. For instance, beginning in 2018:
(i) members of the Enterprise discouraged the promotion of highly-qualified
17
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg18of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
employees in favor of insiders;
(ii) that same year, members of the Enterprise engaged in business impermissible
business activities to further their own personal economic gains;
(iii) that same year, members of the Enterprise abused taxpayer money and
submitted expense reimbursement requests;
(iv) that same year, members of Enterprise retaliated against a Supervisory Judge.
Namely, the Enterprise members intimidated and coerced witnesses manufacturing
complaints against Plaintiff for “blowing the whistle” on the alleged fraudulent
behaviors, including but not limited to mail fraud and misappropriation of taxpayer's
money;
(v) in or about 2019, employees manufactured complaints against a Supervisory
Judge to the Judiciary Performance Commission;
(vi) in or about 2021, employees of the Enterprise wrongfully suspended a
Supervisory Judge;
(vii) in or about 2022, that Supervisory Judge was wrongfully terminated to
preserve the status quo of the Enterprise;
(viii) that same year, the Enterprise retaliated against Plaintiff by wrongfully
disqualifying her counsel’s son from Atlantic City Workers Compensation Court for
the related representation of her; and
(ix) to date, Enterprise continues to manufacture false testimony and coerce
witnesses into giving false testimony against employees in administrative disciplinary
proceedings.
18
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg19of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
89, To the extent that the Enterprise gained economic advantage or intended to gain
economic advantage from its criminal activity, each member of the Enterprise gained or intended
to gain economic advantage from the same activity.
90. The Enterprise has longevity sufficient to permit Defendants to pursue the
Enterprise’s goal of abusing taxpayer money for their own economic and political benefits,
hindering the Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn income and damaging her reputation. The
scheme at the heart of the Enterprise has been in operation since at least January 2018, when
Plaintiff discovered patterns of racketeering activity and engaging in whistleblower activity, and
potentially as far back as September 2011, when Plaintiff sustained injuries from a car accident
while traveling to a work-related on-site visit to the Camden County hearing office. This scheme
is ongoing and will continue until the members of the Enterprise achieve their goal of abusing
taxpayer money for their own benefit and promoting insiders whom they know will continue to
turn a blind eye to their behavior, thereby furthering their economic gain and political influence
in the NJ DOL through nepotistic practices. Among other things, the members of the Enterprise
hindered Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn income and damaged her reputation for not
“playing along” with this scheme and will continue to use their influence to do the like to others
who oppose their scheme.
91. The Enterprise has organized itself into a cohesive group with specific and
assigned responsibilities and a command structure, operating in, and directed from, the United
States. While the organization of the Enterprise may have changed over time, and its members
may have held distinct roles at various times, the Enterprise has been structured to operate as a
unit in order to accomplish the common goals and purposes of their criminal scheme, including
as follows:
19
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 20of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
(a) Defendants Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine
Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane
Roe(s) 1-5 have been involved in, and held positions of responsibility with respect to,
the planning and execution of the scheme to abuse taxpayer money, hinder Plaintiff's
Constitutional right to earn income and damage her reputation, and has taken actions
and directed other conspirators to take actions, necessary to accomplish the overall
aims of the criminal Enterprise, including abuse taxpayer money for their own
economic advantage through lying on expense reimbursement reports, wrongfully
disqualifying Plaintiff from Atlantic City Workers Compensation Court,
manufacturing workplace complaints against Supervisory Judges and intimidating
witnesses to administrative disciplinary proceedings. From and through their business
relationships, they have conducted and participated in the operation and management
of the Enterprise and its affairs, and have been a central participant in the
orchestration, planning, and execution of the scheme to hinder Plaintiffs
Constitutional right to earn income and damage her reputation. Moreover, on
information and belief, Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French,
Carmine Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin and John Doe(s) 1-5
and Jane Roe(s) 1-5 enjoyed personal financial benefits as a result of this scheme
through payments from the State of New Jersey and NJDOL.
(b) Directly and through its agent officers, directors, board members, and
employees of the State of New Jersey and NJDOL have been active participants and
central figures in the operation and management of the Enterprise and its affairs, and
in the orchestration, planning, perpetration, and execution of the scheme to abuse
20
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 21of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
taxpayer money for their own economic advantage, hinder Plaintiff's Constitutional
right to earn and injure her reputation. The State of New Jersey and NJDOL have
been responsible for entering into the agreements and contracts with theit employees
that directly facilitated the Enterprise's criminal activities, such as tax and mail fraud.
Its high-level principals and employees, including Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille
McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie
Mingin and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1-5, knowingly and directly engaged in
the criminal activities of the Enterprise, within the scope of their employment as State
of New Jersey agents. Thus, the individual RICO Defendants, been responsible for
conducting a covert campaign to abuse taxpayer money for their own economic
benefit by, among other things, falsifying expense reimbursement reports, coercing
witnesses to administrative proceedings into giving false testimony, manufacturing
false reports to the Judiciary Performance Commission to remove non-abiding
Supervisory Judges, wrongfully suspending and terminating Plaintiff, and deceiving
the administrative judges about the activities of the RICO Defendants, their
relatedness to and coordination between one another, and the true nature of their
fraudulent business practices. The individual Defendants stood to benefit from this
scheme because, in the event of Plaintiff’s termination from Supervisory Judge, they
could gain economic and political advantages through retaliating against calling into
question the integrity of someone who opposed their overall purpose and scheme of
abusing taxpayer money to further their own economic and political interests.
92. Each of the RICO Defendants knew of the existence of and conducted or
participated in the operation or management of, the Enterprise and its affairs.
21
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 22 of 42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031
93. At all relevant times, the Enterprise was engaged in, and its activities affected,
interstate and foreign commerce within the meaning of N.J.S.A, 2C:41-1. The Enterprise
regularly participated in the multi-million-dollar Enterprise of public government and used
public funds to carry out these practices and cover up their wrongdoing.
B. Pattern of Racketeering Activity
94. The RICO Defendants conducted or participated, directly or indirectly, in their conduct,
management, or operation of the Enterprise’s affairs through a “pattern of racketeering activity”
within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1 and in violation of N.LS.A. 2C:41-2. This pattern
included multiple predicate acts, including abusing taxpayer money through filing false expense
reimbursement reports, obstruction of justice through corruptly endeavoring to influence,
obstruct, or impede the due administration of justice in a pending judicial proceeding in violation
of N.JL.S.A. 2C:41-2, and injuring the reputations of those who opposed their overall plan and
scheme, including the wrongful suspension and termination of Plaintiff from Supervisory Judge.
These predicate acts are all related to each other and to the Enterprise’s purpose of abusing
taxpayer money for their own personal economic and political gains, which lead to, among other
things, hindering Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn income and damaging her reputation for
not “playing along” with this scheme. Instead, promoting insiders whom they know will continue
to turn a blind eye to their behavior, thereby furthering their economic gain and political
influence in the NJ DOL.
95. Furthermore, Defendants’ pattern of racketeering activity is continuous. The
numerous predicate acts detailed below
Preview
CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg lofi Trans ID: LCV20232428031 v ary &yd David R. Castellani (W/ and PA Bar) * Bavid@Castellanilaw.com *Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney CASTELLANI LAW FIRM David C. Castellani (Mw/ Bar) Connor @Castellanilaw.com 450 Tilton Road, Suite 245 Northfield, New Jersey 08225 Caroline S. Castellani (1 8ar) Tel: 609-641-2288 Fax: 609-641-2299 Carctine@ Castellanilaw.com Tax ID No: 20-3743893 August 24, 2023 Honorable James H. Pickering, Jr., J.S.C. Superior Court of New Jersey — Cape May County 9 North main Street, 2" Floor Cape May Court House, NJ 08210 Re: Audrey Kernan v. State of New Jersey; et al. Docket No.: CPM-L-238-22 Dear Judge Pickering: I am writing to request that Your Honor enter an Amended Order permitting Plaintiff to file her Second Amended Complaint by August 25, 2023. I did not see the paragraph in the Order requiring the Amended Complaint be filed by August 15, 2023. Also, the Defendant Palumbo was recently dismissed for lack of prosecution under R. 1:13- Jam enclosing a form of Order under the 5-day Rule for Your Honor’s signature allowing Plaintiff to file her Second Amended Complaint by Friday, August 25, 2023, and reinstate Defendant Palumbo. I have consent of all counsel. y Respectfully suf Au CAS’ p Bk I DAVID R STED) ANI DRC/dh Encl. ce: james.duttera@law.njoag.gov (w/encl.) (Via eCourts) way(@archerlaw.com (w/encl.) (Via eCourts) CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 Dayid Castellani, Esq. #023691991 Castellani Law Firm, LLC 450 Tilton Road, Suite 245 Northfield, NJ 08225-1259 (609) 641-2288 Attorneys for Plaintiff AUDREY KERNAN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: CAPE MAY COUNTY Plaintiff, DOCKET NO. CPM-L-238-22 Y¥. CIVIL ACTION STATE OF NEW JERSEY, NEW JERSEY ORDER DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ROBERT ASARO-ANGELO, TENNILLE McCOY, INGRID FRENCH, CARMINE TAGLIALATELLA, DAISY DoNATI PALUMBO, STEPHANIE MINGIN, and JOHN DOES 1-S AND JANE ROES 1-5; individually, and in their official capacity, THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court on application of David R. Castellani appearing on behalf of Plaintiff for an Order permitting Plaintiff to file the Second Amended Complaint, and the Court having considered the moving papers and for good cause shown, It is on this day of , 2023, ORDERED that plaintiff may file her Second Amended Complaint; and (1) ITIS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall file her amended Complaint on or before August 25, 2023; (2) ITIS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint against Defendant Daisy DoNati Palumbo be and is hereby reinstated; and, CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 (3) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of the within Order shall be served upon all parties within five (5) days. James H. Pickering, Jr., J.S.C. CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pglof42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 David Castellani, Esq. #023691991 Castellani Law Firm, LLC 450 Tilton Road, Suite 245 Northfield, NJ 08225-1259 (609) 641-2288 Attorneys for Plaintiff AUDREY KERNAN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: CAPE MAY COUNTY Plaintiff, DOCKET NO. CPM-L-238-22 v. CIVIL ACTION STATE OF NEW JERSEY, NEW JERSEY SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ROBERT AND JURY DEMAND ASARO-ANGELO, TENNILLE McCOY, INGRID FRENCH, CARMINE TAGLIALATELLA, DAISY DoNATI PALUMBO, STEPHANIE MINGIN, and JOHN DOES 1-5 AND JANE ROES 1-5; individually, and in their official capacity, Plaintiff Audrey Kernan, by and through her attorneys, by way of Complaint against the Defendants, State of New Jersey, New Jersey Department of Labor (“NJDOL”), Robert Asaro- Angelo (“Asaro-Angelo”), Tennille McCoy (“McCoy”), Ingrid French (“French”), Carmine Taglialatella (“Taglialatella”), Daisy Donati Palumbo (“Palumbo”), Stephanie Mingin (Mingin”), and John Doe and Jane Roe 1-5 (said names being fictitious), individually and in their official capacities, (collectively “Defendants”) hereby alleges as follows: CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg2of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 PARTIES AND VENUE 1 Plaintiff Audrey Kernan (“Kerman”) is a resident of Ocean City, Cape May County, State of New Jersey. Plaintiff has been an employee of the State of New Jersey for over twenty years, serving as a Supervisory Workers Compensation Judge. 2 Defendant NIDOL, with headquarters in Trenton, New Jersey, is a branch of the Defendant State of New Jersey government and is responsible for formulating and managing the state’s labor infrastructure by providing statewide services to state and local government agencies as well as the citizens of New Jersey. Defendant State of New Jersey and Defendant NJDOL were Plaintiffs employer at all times herein. 3 Upon information and belief, defendant Robert Asaro-Angelo is and was at all relevant times hereto employed as the Commissioner of the NIDOL. 4 Upon information and belief, defendant Tennille McCoy is and was at all relevant times hereto employed as an Assistant Commissioner of the NJDOL. 5 Upon information and belief, defendant Ingrid French is and was at all relevant times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “Workers Compensation Judge” and/or “Administrative Supervising Judge.” 6 Upon information and belief, defendant Carmine Taglialatella is and was at all relevant times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “Workers Compensation Judge” and/or “Administrative Supervising Judge.” 7 Upon information and belief, defendant Daisy Donati Palumbo is and was at all relevant times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “clerk” and/or “office technician.” 8 Upon information and belief, defendant Stephanie Mingin was at all relevant times hereto employed by the NJDOL as a “clerk” and/or an “office technician.” 2 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg3of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 9 Cape May County is the appropriate venue in this matter under R. 4:3-2. FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS 10. In or about November 2001, Plaintiff was nominated to be a Judge of Workers Compensation for the State of New Jersey Department of Labor by Senator James S. Caficro from Cape May County. Prior to that she worked for the state for several years as a Commissioner on the State Commission of Investigation (SCI). 11, In or about December 2001, Plaintiff was appointed by then Governor of New Jersey Donald T. DiFrancesco to serve as a “Judge” of Workers Compensation for the NIDOL. 12. In or around late January 2002, Plaintiff accepted the appointment, closed her successful law practice, and was sworn in as a “Judge” of Workers Compensation working under Defendant NJDOL. 13. In or about September 2009, in recognition of her stellar work, Plaintiff was notified that she had been elevated to “Administrative Supervisory Judge” which started on or about September 30, 2009. 14, In or about 2017, Plaintiff was once again promoted, this time to “Supervisory Judge” in Atlantic City. The Director of the NJDOL noted Plaintiff’s work effort, diligence and excellent work record and ratings in promoting her. 15, For the majority of Plaintiff's employment from 2002 through 2022, Plaintiff served in the Cape May — Atlantic City vicinage. CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg4of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 Defendants’ Discriminatory Acts, Fraudulent Acts, Coercive Conduct and Other Unethical Behaviors, 16. Over the years of working for the NIDOL, Plaintiff has been referred to as “Black lover,” “wily woman,” “witch,” “playing for the wrong team,” “goody two shoes,” a “nerd”, “weird, “queer”, and even the “white devil” — by other New Jersey Workers’ Compensation judges, supervisors and/or administrative Dept of Labor employees. 17. Over the years of working for the NJDOL, Plaintiff denied repeated requests by a former Chief Judge to change verdicts, alter lists inappropriately and/or other deviant improper state actions amongst other request such as accepted unearned or non-reimbursable mileage vouchers, etc. 18. In or about January 2018, Plaintiff was informed by way of a reporting of another that defendant Judge of Compensation Carmine Taglialatella had created and was engaged in an impermissible ethical conflict of interest by serving as a member of the Board of Trustees of Shore Medical Center located in Somers Point, New Jersey while simultaneously sitting as a Judge of Compensation, along with other violations. 19. Plaintiff informed the Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation Ashley Hutchinson, Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation Art Marchand, Chief Judge and Director of Workers Compensation Russell Wojtenko and/or a supervisor whom she was to report of this conflict of interest, which she reasonably believed maybe a violation of the rules along with other Cannon of Ethics and Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys and/or judges or judges in Worker’s Compensation Court. The reporting party certainly believed so. 20. Upon information and belief, shortly after Plaintiff reported the wrongful conduct, Judge Taglialatella began orchestrating a severe, pervasive pattern of harassment against Plaintiff in retaliation for Plaintiff's report. Further he continued his other wrongdoings 4 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg5of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 in appearances allowed by friends and those he referred to as his “family” amongst other violations. al. In or about June 2018, Plaintiff reported to Chief Judge and Director Wojtenko her reasonable belief that defendant Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation Ingrid French had improperly submitted requests for mileage expense reimbursement over the course of several years, thereby engaging in theft, falsifying public records and fraud, including wire and mail fraud and/or engaging in illegal, illicit and/or unethical conduct. The Chief Judge and/or others in the department of Labor later told Plaintiff that she may have stolen as much as $38,000 in fake mileage vouchers, Further, that the Department of Labor was aware of it but was protecting French via Defendant Assistant Commissioner Tennille McCoy and/or the Commissioner of Labor Robert Asaro-Angelo. 22. Specifically, the NJDOL reassigned Judges to different home venues, which were farther from their actual homes, used the different address for mailing purposes, and incentivized the change in venue through mileage reimbursement kickbacks. Defendant French was well aware at the time of one assignment of a home vicinage to Atlantic City that she was not entitled to reimbursed mileage nor was she entitled to take those monies without paying state and/or federal taxes, 23. Upon information and belief, shortly after Plaintiff reported the aforementioned wrongful conduct, Judge French began orchestrating a severe or pervasive pattern of harassment against Plaintiff in retaliation for her report. 24, In or about April 2018, Plaintiff reported to Chief Judge and Director Wojtenko her reasonable belief that Defendant Clerk Daisy Donati Palumbo was claiming to have had sex with at least one of the attorneys who appeared before the Workers Compensation Court in CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg6of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 Atlantic City while simultancously handling cases brought by that attorney, which Plaintiff reasonably believed was an ethical and/or other conflict. Furthermore, at the direction of Taglialatella and/or others Daisy Donati Palumbo was furthering frauds by re-arranging case lists to benefit certain insurance carriers and “friends/family” of Taglialatella, amongst other ethical and/or other conflicts. 25. Upon information and belief, shortly after Plaintiff reported the wrongful conduct, defendant Palumbo began orchestrating a severe and pervasive pattern of harassment against Plaintiff in retaliation for her report. 26. Thereafter, upon information and belief, defendants Palumbo and Mingin engaged in a continuous pattern of harassment of Plaintiff at the direction of and/or to gain favor with the individual Judge Defendants by stalking Plaintiff and reporting back to the other individual Defendants. Including but not limited to, for example, Defendant Mingin laying on the floor at the base of Plaintiff's office door to attempt to hear and see Plaintiff in an effort to report any conduct of Plaintiff to the other Defendants, 27. For all relevant times hereto, Palumbo continually harassed Plaintiff through the filing of false claims against Plaintiff (which were found to have no merit), repeatedly calling her chambers and hanging up, and even admitting that she was “messing with [Judge Kerman].” 28, Upon information and belief, Defendants Palumbo and Mingin harassed Plaintiff by filing knowingly false claims against Plaintiff either at the direction of and/or to gain favor with the individual judge defendants and the other defendants. Defendant Mingin also engaged in a pattern of altering case lists and “covering” for another judge who was absent afternoons in the workplace. CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg7of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 29, Upon information and belief, in 2018, and 2019, the individual defendants filed numerous false and wrongful claims against Plaintiff in concert with each other and/or other individual defendants with the intention of covering up their wrongful, fraudulent acts and ultimately harming Plaintiff in an effort to remove her from her position for not “playing along.” 30. The individual defendants filed false claims against Plaintiff in retaliation against Plaintiff for her reports of wrongdoings of other New Jersey Workers Compensation Judges and not “playing along” with the ongoing tax fraud, mail fraud and other unethical conduct being committed and permitted by the Defendants, Many of these actions were harmful to the public and working citizens and employees of the State of New Jersey. 31. Upon information and belief, Defendants treated Plaintiff differently and/or in a disparate manner than they have treated and/or would have treated Plaintiff if she was a male. 32. Upon information and belief, Defendants treated Plaintiff differently and/or in a disparate manner than they have treated and/or would have treated Plaintiff if her sexual orientation and/or affections or perception of the same were not of the possibility of being “queer.” 33. Upon information and belief, Defendants would not have retaliated against Plaintiff for her reports and/or disclosures if Plaintiff was a male. 34. Upon information and belief, Defendants would not have retaliated against Plaintiff for her reports and/or disclosures if Plaintiffs sexual orientation and/or affections and/or perception of the same were not of Plaintiff being “queer.” 35, Plaintiff was forced to defend numerous false charges that had no factual and/or legal basis in reality but were brought with the intent to harass and intimidate the Plaintiff into ‘playing along” with the numerous fraudulent activities and unethical violations that were CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 8of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 occurring, The upper management, including Defendant Asaro-Angelo, were well aware of the falsities and/or unlikeliness of truth and/or Defendants condoned this activity. 36. By issuance of various separate letters during this time period to Plaintiff, all complaints against Plaintiff were found to be unsubstantiated and without merit and dismissed. 37. On or about May 14, 2019, Defendant Palumbo again falsely charged Plaintiff with a bogus claim, this time alleging that Plaintiff was “screaming and yelling.” Once again, an investigation proved allegations against Plaintiff had no merit. However, the DOL backed up Plaintiff without themselves in any way legitimately investigating and/or by quite the opposite, having condoned her actions and/or plotting with her for said actions. 38. Up to at least July 8, 2021, Plaintiff was continually harassed and retaliated against by Defendants for reporting wrongful conduct of other judges and staff of the New Jersey Department of Labor. 39. In or about October 2019, NIDOL Assistant Commissioner Tennille McCoy wrongfully, knowingly, willingly, and maliciously filed a complaint with the Judiciary Performance Commission against Plaintiff based on fraudulent statements that had been previously dismissed by the State of New Jersey EEO, knowing that these claims were previously determined to be unfounded and dismissed without merit. 40. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Assistant Commissioner McCoy, was directed and/or manipulated into filing the October 2019 complaint by Defendant NJDOL employees, including but not limited to the individual Defendants, who wanted Plaintiff removed from her position and employment with Defendant State of New Jersey for not “playing along” with their fraudulent activities and other unethical behaviors and in retaliation for her “blowing CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg9of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 the whistle” on wrongful conduct and/or otherwise exercising her right to freedom of speech on matters of public concern, Plaintiff's Wrongful Suspension, Subsequent Wrongful Termination, and Defendants’ Continued, Concerted Coercive and Harassing Behaviors. 41. On or about July 9, 2021, the NIDOL and/or individual Defendants Asaro-Angelo and McCoy and/or John Does 1-10, wrongfully suspended Plaintiffs employment and had two or three building and floor guards/officers physically remove Plaintiff from her workplace without good cause, and for purposes of public humiliation, embarrassment and to destroy and disparage Plaintiff's reputation both professional and business. 42, At no time did any Defendant serve Plaintiff with formal charges against her. 43, For practical purposes, Defendant NJDOL and/or Defendant State of New Jersey and the individual Defendants and John Does 1-10 wrongfully denied Plaintiff promotions she would have otherwise been entitled to and wrongfully suspended Plaintiff for over fourteen months, without due process. 44. Defendants’ alleged reasoning for its “major discipline” against Plaintiff was nothing more than a pretext for retaliation and/or discrimination. Furthermore, Supervising Judge Kernan has been tenured since 2005, and Defendants’ actions are designed, schemed and/or conspired to circumvent tenure protections. 45. By letter dated June 21, 2022, Plaintiff (through legal counsel) withdrew her request for a hearing under N.J.A.C. 12:235-10.9 while stating that she would be pursing “all other avenues including statutory, etc”. This letter did not simultaneously withdraw Plaintiff from her right to a Constitutional hearing under the New Jersey State Constitution. Nor is that hearing waivable without proper procedures. The Constitutional hearing must proceed for CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg10of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 removal in public. To date, plaintiff has never received notice of any constitutional hearing, nor has she ever waived any such hearing. 46. Pursuant to the New Jersey State Constitution, only the Governor may “cause the removal ...” of a judge of compensation and only after a public hearing and initiation by him personally. 47. Upon information and belief, in this case the Governor did not knowingly institute any actions in this matter. 48. The authority to discipline employees under N.J.A.C. is self-contained within the Defendant Department of Labor and is limited to short-term suspension and does NOT include REMOVAL. 49. Further, the short-term suspension can only be enforced after the N.LA.C, 12:235- 10.9 hearing- not before. The Defendant Commissioner of Labor and Defendant NJDOL have proceeded in actions as if they themselves were the “Governor,” in violation of multiple laws, including the New Jersey State Constitution. 50. Contrary to the language of N.J.A.C. 12:235-10.9, Defendant Asaro-Angelo excessively suspended Supervising Judge Kernan for approximately 14 months at full pay, which suspension took effect on July 8, 2021, prior to any Final Hearing at all. Defendant Asaro- Angelo’s long-term suspension of Plaintiffs employment was ultra vires as a violation of both N.LA.C. and the New Jersey State Constitution. Indeed, only the Governor can issue a long-term suspension and/or removal and only after formal charges have been filed and Plaintiff has been afforded a public hearing. 10 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg1lof42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 51. Upon information and belief, the Commissioner had a “buddy” stamp the Governor’s name on a removal letter while the Governor was either in Italy and/or when he was returning home and/or was not in the office. 52. Upon information and belief, the Governor did not sign the “termination Iectter” personally and/or signed it without full knowledge of the underlying matter and/or without any affiant. Nor was this stamped letter publicized as required by any executive Order which is required for removal. 53. At no time was an Executive Order issued by the Governor to remove Plaintiff. 54. Defendant Asaro-Angelo’s wrongful long-term suspension was a public shaming attempt to disparage Plaintiff, Supervising Judge Kernan defaming her at multiple levels. 55. N.LA.C. does not provide the procedural safeguards afforded in the New Jersey Constitution before the termination of employment for Judge of Workers Compensation. Pursuant to the New Jersey Constitution, the Commissioner has no authority to REMOVE (or long-term suspend) a tenured supervising judge. Any such removals must be handled by public hearing pursuant to the New Jersey Constitution, Article V, Sec. IV, Par. 5. Further, the Governor may begin proceedings of REMOVAL only after a recommendation of the Commissioner. Those proceedings must include a public hearing. 56. Upon information and belief, the Commissioner personally was and continues to be directly involved in creating and executing a plan to terminate Plaintiffs employment without following the procedural safeguards afforded to her in the New Jersey Constitution. 57. Even under the most liberal interpretation where the Governor has the ability to delegate such a duty to one of his subordinates, the Governor has a duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Yurthermore, the delegation could not be to this Commissioner ul CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg12of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 since he is intrinsically involved with the ongoing fraud and/or because in any case where the commissioner can assist, it is for judicial violation emanating outside the Department of Labor such as a conviction in a criminal matter which may cause the investigation by the DOL, 58. Defendant NJDOL is an “agency” to which the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) applies, which means they may not adopt “rules” without first satisfying the notice and hearing steps of the APA. 59. Notwithstanding the legal requirements set out under the New Jersey State Constitution to remove a judge of compensation, by letter dated July 25, 2022, a letter apparently stamped with the signature of Phillip Murphy, as Governor, advised that Plaintiff would be “removed as a Workers Compensation Judge effective August 12, 2022, in accordance with NJAC. 12:235-10.9.” As such, Defendants wrongfully terminated Plaintiffs employment, effective August 12, 2022. 60. The July 25, 2022 letter with the stamp of the signature of Governor Murphy is ultra vires as a violation of the New Jersey State Constitution requiring formal charges and a public hearing before any such removal. él. To the extent that Governor Murphy was aware of this matter, he breached his duty set forth as Governor of this State to ensure his delegated duty was faithfully carried out according to the legislative intent. 62. There is not and has never been an Executive Order provided to Plaintiff to legitimatize this Governor’s actions. 63. Defendants’ actions, including the wrongful termination of Plaintiff's employment, were in retaliation for Plaintiff reporting what she reasonably believed were 12 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg13o0f42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 violations of the law, illegal, unethical, and/or fraudulent conduct; and also, in retaliation for Plaintiffs attempt to exercise her New Jersey Constitutional Right to free speech. 64. To continue their pattern of harassing Plaintiff, even after Defendants wrongfully terminated Plaintiff's employment, after over twenty years of loyal service as a Judge of Workers Compensation, Defendants wrongfully and maliciously denied Plaintiffs claim for unemployment benefits, knowing full well that Plaintiff was legally entitled to all such benefits. Defendant Department of Labor has an obvious conflict regarding Plaintiff and her unemployment benefits but upon information and belief, did not make any attempt to recuse itself or put up an ethical barrier from the individually named Defendants. 65. Plaintiff would not have been suspended and/or terminated based on the same factual allegations if she were a male and/or had a different affectionate or sexual orientation or perception to the same. In addition, similarly situated Workers Compensation Judges committed similar if not more severe offenses than Plaintiff, including Defendants Ingrid French and also Bradley Henson, and did not receive as severe discipline as Plaintiff. 66. Upon information and belief, male New Jersey Workers Compensation Judges, including but not limited to Workers Compensation Judge Brad Henson (Ret.) whose conduct was much more egregious than anything Plaintiff was ever accused of were not suspended and/or terminated based on the same or similar allegations, if not more severe allegations as compared to Plaintiff. 67. Upon information and belief Defendants’ actions would not have occurred but for Plaintiff's gender (female) and sexual orientation and/or affections or perception of the same (“queer”), 13 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg14of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 Continuing Harassment Now by Removal of Plaintiffs Counsel’s Son in Court 68. In or about October 2022, for no legitimate reason other than to continue to harass Plaintiff and her legal counsel, Defendants disqualified Plaintiff's Counsel’s son, who is a lawyer, from practicing within the two entire venues of Cape May County and Atlantic City Workers Compensation Court. 69. Specifically, Plaintiff's Counsel’s son, as an attorney, was disqualified from the entire venue without being afforded the due process of a conflict hearing beforehand. 70. Upon information and belief this act by Defendants was a continued, concerted pattern of harassment in further attempts to cover up their wrongful, fraudulent acts and unethical conduct through disqualifying Plaintiff's Counsel’s son from working in the entire venue of the Atlantic City Workers Compensation Court. 7, This was a concerted purposeful attempt by Defendants to put a strain on the attorney-client relationship. Upon information and belief, this Directive came from the Defendants and/or their deputy attorneys general and/or Chief Judge/Director Maria Del Valle Koch. 72. This constitutes a concerted effort and continuous and systematic pattern of harassment to further insulate the wrongdoings of those involved in the fraudulent activities through intimidation, fabrication, and otherwise wrongful behavior. 73. On or about June 14, 2019, and October 4, 2021, Plaintiff served Defendants with Notices of Tort Claims pursuant to N.J.S.A. 59:8-1 to -11. 74. Mail fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, and coercing witness testimony are cach predicate offenses of the New Jersey State RICO statute. 14 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg15of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 75. Mail fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, and coercing witness testimony are each predicate offenses of the conspiracy to commit RICO violations. 7. Under N.J.S.A, 2C:51-2, if found guilty of the facts as alleged in a Criminal Court of law, the acts may serve as a basis of forfeiture of public office. Continuing Harassment by Failure to Settle Plaintiff’s Workers Comp Claims 77. Upon information and belief, in or about beginning in September 2011 and including claims through July 2020, Defendants have directed that none of Plaintiffs’ personal workers compensation claims shall be settled and/or processed. 2B. Specifically, Plaintiff's Claims were either fraudulently dismissed and/or remain unresolved to date. Irreparable Injury to Plaintiff, 79. Unless the aforementioned conduct of Defendants is enjoined and restrained by this Court, Plaintiff will suffer substantial and irreparable injury, such injury will include, but is not limited to: (a) Injury to goodwill and reputation as a public figure; (b) Injury to goodwill and reputation as an ethical, practicing attorney in good standing of the State of New Jersey; (c) Loss of prospective job opportunities due to injury to goodwill and reputation as a public figure; (d) Loss of prospective job opportunities due to injury as an ethical, practicing attorney in good standing of the State of New Jersey; 15 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg16o0f42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 (e) Loss of prospective business relationship and/or clients due to injury to goodwill and reputation; and (f) Severe emotional distress is proximately caused by intentional tortious activities, including but not limited to intentional fraud and defamation. 80. It is difficult, at this time, for Plaintiff to estimate the amount of prospective business relationships lost as a result of Defendants’ discriminatory acts, fraudulent acts, unethical acts, and otherwise wrongful conduct. 81. Plaintiff cannot estimate with any degree of certainty, at this time, the nature and extent of her actual and potential damages incurred and to be incurred as a direct and proximate consequence of Defendants’ wrongful conduct. As such, the damages and injuries sustained, as well as those threatened by reason of the intentional and continuous actions of Defendants are irreparable and Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law for the interference and damaging activities of Defendants. Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to protection against further damage to her goodwill and reputation, of her existing and prospective economic advantages and common law rights from the tortious, damaging conduct of Defendants. COUNT ONE VIOLATION OF RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS (RICO) PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES UNDER NuJ.S.A. 2C:41-1-2 82, Plaintiff repeats and reasserts ail the allegations set forth in the foregoing paragraphs as if set forth herein at length. 83. At all relevant times, Plaintiff is a person within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1 through 6. 16 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg17of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 84. At all relevant times, cach Defendant is a person within the meaning of N.LS.A. 2C:41-1 through 6. 85. At all relevant times, each of the RICO Defendants was, and is, a person that exists separate and distinct from the RICO Enterprise described below. A. The RICO Enterprise 86. Defendants Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin, and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1- 5 constitute an association-in-fact enterprise within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1 through 6, referred to herein as the “Enterprise.” 87. Defendants Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine Taglialatella, Daisy Dinato Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin, and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1- 5 are a group of persons associated together in fact, for the common purpose of carrying on an ongoing criminal enterprise. In particular, the Enterprise has a common goal of abusing taxpayer money and hindering Plaintiff’s Constitutional right to earn income (preventing promotions and wrongful termination) and damaging her reputation through a sophisticated, coordinated, sustained, well-orchestrated and multi-year campaign of deceptive conduct, nepotistic hiring practices, and misuse of State tax revenue to further their own personal and political interests. They intended to further that objective and exercised substantial discretion in doing so. 88. The Enterprise is ongoing because members of the Enterprise have long-standing business relationships rooted in the State, common control, ongoing business arrangements, and a mutual interest in common (criminal) activities. For instance, beginning in 2018: (i) members of the Enterprise discouraged the promotion of highly-qualified 17 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg18of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 employees in favor of insiders; (ii) that same year, members of the Enterprise engaged in business impermissible business activities to further their own personal economic gains; (iii) that same year, members of the Enterprise abused taxpayer money and submitted expense reimbursement requests; (iv) that same year, members of Enterprise retaliated against a Supervisory Judge. Namely, the Enterprise members intimidated and coerced witnesses manufacturing complaints against Plaintiff for “blowing the whistle” on the alleged fraudulent behaviors, including but not limited to mail fraud and misappropriation of taxpayer's money; (v) in or about 2019, employees manufactured complaints against a Supervisory Judge to the Judiciary Performance Commission; (vi) in or about 2021, employees of the Enterprise wrongfully suspended a Supervisory Judge; (vii) in or about 2022, that Supervisory Judge was wrongfully terminated to preserve the status quo of the Enterprise; (viii) that same year, the Enterprise retaliated against Plaintiff by wrongfully disqualifying her counsel’s son from Atlantic City Workers Compensation Court for the related representation of her; and (ix) to date, Enterprise continues to manufacture false testimony and coerce witnesses into giving false testimony against employees in administrative disciplinary proceedings. 18 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46PM Pg19of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 89, To the extent that the Enterprise gained economic advantage or intended to gain economic advantage from its criminal activity, each member of the Enterprise gained or intended to gain economic advantage from the same activity. 90. The Enterprise has longevity sufficient to permit Defendants to pursue the Enterprise’s goal of abusing taxpayer money for their own economic and political benefits, hindering the Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn income and damaging her reputation. The scheme at the heart of the Enterprise has been in operation since at least January 2018, when Plaintiff discovered patterns of racketeering activity and engaging in whistleblower activity, and potentially as far back as September 2011, when Plaintiff sustained injuries from a car accident while traveling to a work-related on-site visit to the Camden County hearing office. This scheme is ongoing and will continue until the members of the Enterprise achieve their goal of abusing taxpayer money for their own benefit and promoting insiders whom they know will continue to turn a blind eye to their behavior, thereby furthering their economic gain and political influence in the NJ DOL through nepotistic practices. Among other things, the members of the Enterprise hindered Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn income and damaged her reputation for not “playing along” with this scheme and will continue to use their influence to do the like to others who oppose their scheme. 91. The Enterprise has organized itself into a cohesive group with specific and assigned responsibilities and a command structure, operating in, and directed from, the United States. While the organization of the Enterprise may have changed over time, and its members may have held distinct roles at various times, the Enterprise has been structured to operate as a unit in order to accomplish the common goals and purposes of their criminal scheme, including as follows: 19 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 20of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 (a) Defendants Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1-5 have been involved in, and held positions of responsibility with respect to, the planning and execution of the scheme to abuse taxpayer money, hinder Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn income and damage her reputation, and has taken actions and directed other conspirators to take actions, necessary to accomplish the overall aims of the criminal Enterprise, including abuse taxpayer money for their own economic advantage through lying on expense reimbursement reports, wrongfully disqualifying Plaintiff from Atlantic City Workers Compensation Court, manufacturing workplace complaints against Supervisory Judges and intimidating witnesses to administrative disciplinary proceedings. From and through their business relationships, they have conducted and participated in the operation and management of the Enterprise and its affairs, and have been a central participant in the orchestration, planning, and execution of the scheme to hinder Plaintiffs Constitutional right to earn income and damage her reputation. Moreover, on information and belief, Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1-5 enjoyed personal financial benefits as a result of this scheme through payments from the State of New Jersey and NJDOL. (b) Directly and through its agent officers, directors, board members, and employees of the State of New Jersey and NJDOL have been active participants and central figures in the operation and management of the Enterprise and its affairs, and in the orchestration, planning, perpetration, and execution of the scheme to abuse 20 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 21of42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 taxpayer money for their own economic advantage, hinder Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn and injure her reputation. The State of New Jersey and NJDOL have been responsible for entering into the agreements and contracts with theit employees that directly facilitated the Enterprise's criminal activities, such as tax and mail fraud. Its high-level principals and employees, including Robert Asaro-Angelo, Tennille McCoy, Ingrid French, Carmine Taglialatella, Daisy Donati Palumbo, Stephanie Mingin and John Doe(s) 1-5 and Jane Roe(s) 1-5, knowingly and directly engaged in the criminal activities of the Enterprise, within the scope of their employment as State of New Jersey agents. Thus, the individual RICO Defendants, been responsible for conducting a covert campaign to abuse taxpayer money for their own economic benefit by, among other things, falsifying expense reimbursement reports, coercing witnesses to administrative proceedings into giving false testimony, manufacturing false reports to the Judiciary Performance Commission to remove non-abiding Supervisory Judges, wrongfully suspending and terminating Plaintiff, and deceiving the administrative judges about the activities of the RICO Defendants, their relatedness to and coordination between one another, and the true nature of their fraudulent business practices. The individual Defendants stood to benefit from this scheme because, in the event of Plaintiff’s termination from Supervisory Judge, they could gain economic and political advantages through retaliating against calling into question the integrity of someone who opposed their overall purpose and scheme of abusing taxpayer money to further their own economic and political interests. 92. Each of the RICO Defendants knew of the existence of and conducted or participated in the operation or management of, the Enterprise and its affairs. 21 CPM-L-000238-22 08/24/2023 3:18:46 PM Pg 22 of 42 Trans ID: LCV20232428031 93. At all relevant times, the Enterprise was engaged in, and its activities affected, interstate and foreign commerce within the meaning of N.J.S.A, 2C:41-1. The Enterprise regularly participated in the multi-million-dollar Enterprise of public government and used public funds to carry out these practices and cover up their wrongdoing. B. Pattern of Racketeering Activity 94. The RICO Defendants conducted or participated, directly or indirectly, in their conduct, management, or operation of the Enterprise’s affairs through a “pattern of racketeering activity” within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1 and in violation of N.LS.A. 2C:41-2. This pattern included multiple predicate acts, including abusing taxpayer money through filing false expense reimbursement reports, obstruction of justice through corruptly endeavoring to influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of justice in a pending judicial proceeding in violation of N.JL.S.A. 2C:41-2, and injuring the reputations of those who opposed their overall plan and scheme, including the wrongful suspension and termination of Plaintiff from Supervisory Judge. These predicate acts are all related to each other and to the Enterprise’s purpose of abusing taxpayer money for their own personal economic and political gains, which lead to, among other things, hindering Plaintiff's Constitutional right to earn income and damaging her reputation for not “playing along” with this scheme. Instead, promoting insiders whom they know will continue to turn a blind eye to their behavior, thereby furthering their economic gain and political influence in the NJ DOL. 95. Furthermore, Defendants’ pattern of racketeering activity is continuous. The numerous predicate acts detailed below