The opinion of the court was delivered by: THOMAS GRIESA, Senior District Judge
Pro se plaintiff Matilda Gilbert, a former New York State
parole officer, brings this action under Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., alleging
discrimination based on race and sex. Defendants are the New York
State Division of Parole and six individuals employed by that
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) or, alternatively for summary judgment under
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, for the following reasons: (1) the Title VII
claims fail to state a cause of action against any of the
individual defendants, as enunciated in Tomka v. Seiler Corp.,
66 F.3d 1295 (2d Cir. 1995); (2) the individual defendants were
not served properly with process, and accordingly the court does not have
personal jurisdiction over them; and (3) the claims against all
defendants are barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
In her opposition papers on the motion, plaintiff does not
oppose the application to dismiss as to the individual
defendants. Therefore, this opinion will be limited to the issue
of the statute of limitations as to the Division.
Plaintiff filed her initial complaint on April 6, 2000
asserting race and gender discrimination. The sole defendant
named in the complaint was the New York State Division of Parole.
On August 4, 2000, plaintiff filed an amended complaint,
identical to the first, but added the six named individual
The following is a summary of the allegations in the amended
complaint and in plaintiff's Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission ("EEOC") filings, which were appended to the complaint
and amended complaint.
Plaintiff alleges that while she was employed as a New York
State parole officer, she reported to her supervisors on April
30, 1997 that she was being stalked in the field by unknown
individuals. Her EEOC papers also assert that she reported, in a
memorandum to her Area Supervisor dated May 1, 1997, that she was
being followed again. Plaintiff claims in her EEOC papers that
the handling of her reports of stalking did not follow proper
procedure because she was a black female and that "a white male
would have been handled differently."
On June 2, 1997 plaintiff was placed on involuntary
administrative leave due to concerns about her psychological
stability and was required to undergo psychiatric evaluation, and
was required to turn in her firearm at this time.
On July 21; 1997, plaintiff was declared to be mentally unfit
for the duties of a parole officer.
From July 23, 1997 to June 30, 1998 plaintiff was placed on
sick leave, exhausting her leave credit and not receiving salary
for some of that period.
Plaintiff claims that all these actions against her came about
because she was a black female.
According to plaintiff's amended complaint, plaintiff was
informed in September 1997 that a hearing was in the process of
being scheduled to determine whether she was fit to return to
work. This hearing was held on May 19, 1998. The hearing ...