Legal Document: Ming Zeng v. Ellenoff Grossman & Schole Llp, Douglas S. Ellenoff

On October 24, 2023 a EXHIBIT(S) - 1 - Amended Notice of Removal and Declaration of Meredith Cavallaro, filed in Federal Court was filed involving a dispute between Ming Zeng, and Douglas S. Ellenoff, Ellenoff Grossman & Schole Llp, for Torts - Other (employment discrimination) in the District Court of New York County.

Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023

EXHIBIT 1
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 Case 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10 Filed 11/28/23 Page 1 of 4NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
RECEIVED

Meredith Cavallaro
mc@pwlawyers.com
PADUANO & WEINTRAUB LLP
1251 Avenue of the Americas, Ninth Floor
New York, New York 10020
Attorneys for Defendants
Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP and Douglas S. Ellenoff
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------x
MING ZENG, :
Plaintiff,
: Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC
v.
:
ELLENOFF GROSSMAN & SCHOLE LLP
and DOUGLAS S. ELLENOFF, :

Defendants. :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

AMENDED NOTICE OF REMOVAL

Defendants Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP (“EGS”) and Douglas S.

Ellenoff (“Mr. Ellenoff”) (collectively, “Defendants”) file this Amended Notice of

Removal of the above-captioned action commenced by Plaintiff Ming Zeng

(“Plaintiff”) from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County,

where the action is now pending, to the United States District Court for the

Southern District of New York, pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 205, and state:

1. The above-captioned action was commenced in the Supreme

Court of the State of New York, County of New York, under the caption Ming Zeng

v. Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP, et al., Index No. 160393/2023, and is now

pending in that court (the “State Court Action”). Plaintiff’s Complaint, setting
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 Case 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10 Filed 11/28/23 Page 2 of 4NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
RECEIVED

forth the claims for relief upon which the action is based, was served on

Defendants on October 26, 2023.

2. Plaintiff is a former employee of defendant EGS.

3. In her Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that she was subjected to

discrimination and retaliation during her employment. Plaintiff asserts claims

arising under Chapter 1, Title 8 of the Administrative Code of the City of New

York, Section 8-107, known as the New York City Human Rights Law, for

discrimination and retaliation against Defendants and aiding and abetting

discrimination and retaliation against Mr. Ellenoff.

4. In connection with her employment, Plaintiff executed an

Arbitration Agreement on September 15, 2022 and an Acknowledgement of

Defendant EGS’s Arbitration Program Policy on September 2, 2021 (collectively,

the “Arbitration Agreements”), which call for the arbitration of all disputes related

to her employment with Defendant EGS. Copies of the Arbitration Agreements

are annexed to the Declaration of Meredith Cavallaro as Exhibit E, which is being

filed with this Amended Notice of Removal. The parties’ Arbitration Agreements

are valid, have not been revoked, and are enforceable upon such grounds as exist

at law or in equity, and such Arbitration Agreements appear in contracts

evidencing transactions in interstate commerce.

5. Plaintiff is a citizen of China. During her employment with

Defendant EGS, Plaintiff was authorized to work in the United States.

2
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 Case 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10 Filed 11/28/23 Page 3 of 4NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
RECEIVED

6. The United States District Court for the Southern District of

New York has jurisdiction over this action, and removal is proper, pursuant to 9

U.S.C. §§ 203 and 205, in that the State Court Action relates to an arbitration

agreement falling under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of

Foreign Arbitral Awards, and the State Court Action affects the arbitration rights

of Defendants under the Convention.

7. A copy of all process, pleadings, and orders filed and served

upon Defendants is annexed to the Declaration of Meredith Cavallaro, which is

being filed with this Amended Notice of Removal.

8. Removal of Plaintiff’s State Court Action is this Court is timely

under 9 U.S.C. § 205 because the State Court Action has not yet gone to trial.

9. Venue is proper in this Court under 9 U.S.C. § 204 because,

save for the Arbitration Agreements, an action or proceeding with respect to the

controversy between the parties could have been brought in this district court,

and the County of New York, which is located within this judicial district, is the

place designated in the Arbitration Agreements as the place of arbitration within

the United States.

10. Defendants will give written notice of the filing of this

Amended Notice of Removal to Plaintiff, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446. A copy

of this Amended Notice of Removal will be filed with the Clerk of the Supreme

Court of the State of New York, County of New York, as required by 28

U.S.C. § 1446.

3
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 Case 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10 Filed 11/28/23 Page 4 of 4NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
RECEIVED

WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that this action be

removed to this Court from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County

of New York.

Dated: New York, New York
November 28, 2023

PADUANO & WEINTRAUB LLP

By: /s/ Meredith Cavallaro
Meredith Cavallaro
1251 Avenue of the Americas, Ninth Floor
New York, New York 10020
(212) 785-9100
mc@pwlawyers.com

Attorneys for Defendants
Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP
and Douglas S. Ellenoff

cc: Brian Heller, Esq.
Davida Perry, Esq.
Schwartz Perry & Heller LLP
3 Park Avenue, Suite 2700
New York, New York 10016
(212) 889-6565
bheller@sphlegal.com
dperry@sphlegal.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff
Ming Zeng

4
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9Case 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-1 Filed 11/28/23 RECEIVED
Page 1 ofNYSCEF:
2 11/29/2023

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------x
MING ZENG, :
Plaintiff,
: Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC
v.
:
ELLENOFF GROSSMAN & SCHOLE LLP
and DOUGLAS S. ELLENOFF, :

Defendants. :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

DECLARATION OF MEREDITH CAVALLARO

MEREDITH CAVALLARO, under penalty of perjury, declares and states:

1. I am a member of the bar of this Court and a member of the firm of

Paduano & Weintraub LLP, attorneys for Defendants Ellenoff Grossman & Schole

LLP and Douglas S. Ellenoff (“Defendants”). I submit this Declaration in support of

Defendants’ Amended Notice of Removal.

2. Annexed hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the Summons

and Complaint, dated October 24, 2023, that was filed by Plaintiff Ming Zeng

(“Plaintiff”) in the action entitled Ming Zeng v. Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP, et

al., Index No. 160393/2023, in New York State Supreme Court, County of New York

(the “Action”), and that was served on Defendants on October 26, 2023.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9Case 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-1 Filed 11/28/23 RECEIVED
Page 2 ofNYSCEF:
2 11/29/2023

3. Annexed hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Affidavit

of Service of the Summons and Complaint that was filed by Plaintiff in the Action

on October 27, 2023.

4. Annexed hereto as Exhibit C are true and correct copies of the Notices

of Appearance and Stipulation of Time to Answer filed by my firm in the Action on

November 14, 2023.

5. Annexed hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the docket in

the Action.

6. Annexed hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of the

Arbitration Agreement executed by Plaintiff on September 15, 2022, as well as

Defendant Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP’s Arbitration Program Policy and

Plaintiff’s Policy Acknowledgement Status Report dated September 2, 2021.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1746, I affirm under penalty
of perjury under the laws of the United States of America
that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on
November 28, 2023.

/s/ Meredith Cavallaro
Meredith Cavallaro

2
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 1 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023

EXHIBIT A
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 2 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
MING ZENG, Index No.

Plaintiff(s),

-against-
Summons
ELLENOFF GROSSMAN & SCHOLE LLP and
DOUGLAS S. ELLENOFF,

II Date Index No. Purchased: October 24, 2023
Defendant(s).

To the above named Defendant(s)
ELLENOFF GROSSMAN & SCHOLE LLP and DOUGLAS S. ELLENOFF
1345 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10105
II
You are hereby summoned to answer the complaint in this action and to serve
a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this summons, to serve
a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiff's attorney within 20 days after the service of
this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is
complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New
York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against
you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.

The basis of venue is location of occurrence
which is New York County

Dated: New York, NY

October 24, 2023
Schwartz Perry & Heller, LLP

by__________________________
Brian Heller
Attorneys for Plaintiff
3 Park Avenue, Suite 2700
New York, NY 10016
(212) 889-6565
bheller@sphlegal.com

1 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 3 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------------X
MING ZENG,
Index No.:
Plaintiff,

-against- VERIFIED COMPLAINT

ELLENOFF GROSSMAN & SCHOLE LLP and
DOUGLAS S. ELLENOFF,

Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------X

Plaintiff Ming Zeng, as and for her Verified Complaint, all upon information and belief,

respectfully alleges as follows:

IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES

1. At all relevant times mentioned herein, Plaintiff Ming Zeng (“Zeng”) was

employed by Defendants Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP and Douglas S. Ellenoff until she was

terminated on April 27, 2023, soon after she complained about sexual harassment.

2. At all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant Ellenoff Grossman & Schole

LLP (“EGS”) is a limited liability partnership that is authorized to and does operate in the County,

City and State of New York.

3. At all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant Douglas S. Ellenoff (“Ellenoff”)

is a founding member of EGS and is the individual who terminated Zeng.

4. EGS is a mid-sized New York City-based law firm founded in 1992 that provides

legal services in business and litigation related matters.

BACKGROUND RELEVANT TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

5. Zeng commenced her employment with Defendants on September 1, 2021, shortly

after obtaining her Juris Doctor from the George Washington Law School in or around June 2021.

2 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 4 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

6. Zeng was hired as an Associate Attorney in EGS’ Capital Markets Group.

7. At all relevant times, Zeng was qualified for her position.

8. Zeng performed her duties to the satisfaction of EGS, as confirmed by the positive

feedback she received, which included comments from colleagues and Partners during the one

month after the sexual harassment investigation and before her termination, such as, “Thanks so

much for this, and great job!”, “Thanks for all of the hard work,” “Thanks so much for your

continued efforts for these SPAC clients” and “Congrats and thank you all!!! Really appreciate all

the late nights/early mornings!!!”

9. One of the attorneys to whom Zeng reported was Shang Jiang (“Jiang”), who Zeng

believes is around 10 years older than Zeng, has practiced law for approximately nine years and

joined EGS in approximately May 2018.

10. At all relevant times Jiang held managerial or supervisory authority over Zeng, and

Jiang had actually been one of the individuals who interviewed Zeng for her role at EGS.

11. Jiang injected sex into her conversations with Zeng, creating a sexually-charged

environment for Zeng at EGS, including asking Zeng, unsolicited, who the most handsome man

at the firm was, discussing a lesbian couple that Zeng did not know and talking about how monkey

pox is mainly transmitted between gay men.

12. Jiang also inferred that Zeng should enter into a romantic relationship with her,

which included, when discussing work visas, Jiang proposing to Zeng, “Marry me,” rather than

other methods of obtaining work authorization.

13. On March 2, 2023, Jiang’s advances became even more blatant, as she told Zeng,

in Jiang’s office, in Chinese, that the reason Zeng had a cat was because she was “lonely and

horny” and said that Zeng was “spending too much money on the cat” and “should go get a

3 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 5 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

relationship.”

14. Jiang made it clear that she wanted Zeng to enter into a relationship with her,

saying, “Don’t keep the cat, keep me instead,” which was a clear reference to Jiang living with

Zeng in a romantic relationship.

15. In order to bolster Jiang’s proposal for Zeng to accept a romantic relationship, Jiang

told Zeng, “Your cat still needs you to buy pet insurance for her. I don’t even need you to buy

insurance for me because EGS is paying for my insurance.”

16. Jiang’s sexual advances were unwelcome and offensive and made Zeng feel

incredibly degraded and threatened in her workplace, as Jiang held a senior position over Zeng, all

of which confirms that Zeng was treated less well because of her gender.

17. Zeng had not expressed any sexual interest in Jiang and had done nothing to warrant

Jiang’s interest.

18. Zeng had trepidations about reporting Jiang’s sexual advances, as she was a more

senior Associate than Zeng and was well liked at the firm.

19. Nevertheless, Zeng reported Jiang’s sexual harassment to EGS on March 8, 2023,

speaking to Genesis Cevallos (“Cevallos”) of EGS’ Human Resources.

20. Zeng was advised that an investigation would be conducted by Mitchell Borger, an

attorney at EGS.

21. On March 29, 2023, while the investigation was purportedly still going on, EGS

sent a firm-wide email announcing that Jiang had been named a “Top Woman Rising Star” in the

annual Super Lawyers’ New York Metro Top Woman 2022 list.

22. On April 11, 2023, Zeng received a closing memo from Cevallos, stating that

“appropriate follow up communications have occurred with Jiang” and that “Jiang has made clear

4 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 6 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

that she is embarrassed and apologetic for causing you discomfort,” while recognizing that “this

was a stressful situation for [Zeng] and we appreciate your cooperation.”

23. Jiang did not suffer any consequences for her sexual harassment of Zeng, as Jiang

continued to work at EGS without incident, and was even touted for being named a “Rising Star.”

24. Zeng was terminated just over two weeks later, on April 27, 2023.

25. The termination occurred in a conference room with the following individuals

present: (i) Defendant Ellenoff, one of the three founding partners of EGS, (ii) Cevallos, who just

investigated Zeng’s complaint one month earlier, and (iii) Richard Anslow (“Anslow”), a Partner

in the group where Zeng worked, who was present virtually.

26. The reason that Ellenoff gave for terminating Zeng was “poor performance,” which

flew in the face of all the positive feedback that Zeng had received throughout her employment.

27. When Zeng questioned Ellenoff’s claim of poor performance, Ellenoff was unable

to provide any examples and instead claimed that it was Zeng’s “aggressiveness” for seeking

specific examples of her poor performance that was the reason she was unfit to work at EGS, and

he made the ridiculous claim that the fact Zeng does not know why her performance was poor

already proves why she was a poor performer.

28. Zeng told Anslow that the only criticism she had received from him was that she

had not replied to his emails when she was on vacation, after which she always replied to his emails

instantly even when she was on vacation or during holidays.

29. Ellenoff directed Anslow not to respond to Zeng.

30. Ellenoff refused to further engage with Zeng about the basis for EGS’ claim of poor

performance, stating that “the decision has already been made” and, “This is a private practice, we

can do whatever we want.”

5 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 7 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

31. Cevallos then handed Zeng a termination notice and Ellenoff opened the door and

asked Zeng to get out immediately, threatening that he would call security if she caused a

disturbance, an accusation that was completely unwarranted.

32. Zeng soon spoke with an Of Counsel attorney at EGS with whom Zeng often

worked, who appeared shocked that Zeng had been terminated and said he would speak to another

Partner with whom Zeng worked.

33. Zeng also spoke with a Partner of EGS with whom Zeng often worked with, who

sounded angry and who told Zeng that he would “definitely” talk to the relevant people about this.

34. The real reason that Zeng was terminated was because she protested sexual

harassment at EGS.

35. As a result of Defendants’ discriminatory conduct, Zeng has suffered the adverse

effects of sexual harassment and retaliation, which includes damages to the quality of her life, her

self-esteem, self-respect, professional reputation, and financial and emotional well-being because

she was subjected to the humiliating and demeaning type of conduct described herein, all of which

will continue and remain a source of humiliation, distress and financial loss to Zeng into the future.

36. Here, Defendants’ conduct towards Zeng shows that they acted with willful or

wanton negligence, or recklessness, or a conscious disregard of Zeng’s rights under the New York

City Human Rights Law, or that their unlawful actions against Zeng were so reckless as to amount

to a disregard of Zeng’s rights, so that in addition to all the damages inflicted upon Zeng and in

addition to all the measure of relief to which Zeng may properly be entitled herein, Defendants

should also be required to pay punitive damages as punishment for their discriminatory conduct in

order to deter them and others similarly situated from engaging in such conduct in the future.

6 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 8 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

AS FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION ON
BEHALFOF ZENG AGAINST DEFENDANTS FOR
GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF
THE NEW YORK CITY HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

37. Zeng repeats, re-alleges and incorporates in full paragraphs 1 through 36 of this

Complaint, as though fully set forth at length herein.

38. At the time that Zeng was subjected to the discriminatory conduct described herein,

she was in a protected class under the New York City Human Rights Law because of her gender.

39. Throughout the time of her employment with Defendants, Zeng was fully qualified

for her position and was in a position to continue working in that capacity.

40. Defendants treated Zeng less well because of her gender, as confirmed by the

hostile treatment and sexual harassment that Zeng endured by Jiang, who held managerial or

supervisory authority over her, and which EGS and Ellenoff ratified and condoned by terminating

Zeng.

41. The aforementioned acts of Defendants constitute unlawful gender discrimination

against Zeng in violation of Chapter I, Title 8 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York,

§8-107(1)(a) (referred to as “the New York City Human Rights Law”), which provides inter alia,

that:

It shall be unlawful discriminatory practice: (a) For an employer or
an employee or agent thereof, because of the . . . gender . . . of any
person to discriminate against such a person in compensation or in
terms, conditions or privileges of employment.

42. As a result of Defendants’ violation of the New York City Human Rights Law,

Defendants are liable to Zeng pursuant to §8-502(a) of said statute for “damages” and pursuant to

§8-502(f) of said statute for “costs and reasonable attorney’s fees,” as has been judicially

established.

7 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 9 of 14
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2023
10/24/2023

43. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct complained of herein, Zeng

has suffered damages, injuries and losses, both actual and prospective, which include financial

loss, damage to her career and emotional pain and suffering, so that Zeng seeks in this First Cause

of Action compensatory damages in the amount of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000).

44. Here, Defendants’ conduct towards Zeng showed that they acted with willful or

wanton negligence, or recklessness, or a conscious disregard of Zeng’s rights under the New York

City Human Rights Law, or that their unlawful actions against Zeng were so reckless as to amount

to a disregard of Zeng’s rights, so that in addition to all the damages inflicted upon Zeng and in

addition to all the measures of relief to which Zeng may properly be entitled herein, Defendants

should additionally be required to pay punitive damages as punishment for their discriminatory

conduct in the further amount of Three Million ($3,000,000) Dollars, in order to deter EGS and

others similarly situated from engaging in such conduct in the future.

45. Zeng, therefore, seeks judgment against Defendants on this First Cause of Action,

including, among other things, for compensatory damages in the sum of Two Million Dollars

($2,000,000), and the additional further sum of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) in punitive

damages, together with costs, pre-judgment interest and reasonable attorney’s fees on this cause

of action, making a total claim of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000).

AS FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF
ZENG AGAINST DEFENDANTS FOR RETALIATION IN VIOLATION
OF §8-107(7) OF THE NEW YORK CITY HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

46. Zeng repeats, re-alleges and incorporates in full paragraphs 1 through 45 of this

Complaint as though fully set forth at length herein.

47. When Zeng complained about Jiang’s sexual harassment on March 8, 2023, she

was engaged in a protected activity under the New York City Human Rights Law of which

8 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 10 ofNYSCEF:
RECEIVED 14 10/24/2023
11/29/2023

Defendants were aware.

48. As a proximate result of Zeng engaging in protected activity under the New York

City Human Rights Law, Zeng suffered adverse employment action by being terminated on April

27, 2023.

49. The circumstances in this case, including the close temporal proximity between

Zeng’s complaint and her termination, and the falsity of Defendants’ claim of poor performance,

demonstrates that Defendants’ actions were motivated, at least in part, by retaliation.

50. The aforementioned acts of Defendants constitute unlawful retaliation against Zeng

in violation of §8-107(7) of the New York City Human Rights Law, which provides, inter alia,

that:

It shall be unlawful discriminatory practice for any person engaged
in any activity to which this chapter applies to retaliate or
discriminate in any manner against any person because such person
has (i) opposed any practice forbidden under this chapter . . .

51. As a result of Defendants’ violations of the New York City Human Rights Law §8-

107(7), Defendants are liable to Zeng pursuant §8-502(a) of said statute for “damages, including

punitive damages,” and pursuant to §8-502(f) of the statute for “costs and reasonable attorney’s

fees,” as provided for under the law.

52. Zeng has been caused to suffer injuries resulting in financial loss, emotional

anguish and suffering, and has been humiliated, demeaned and otherwise degraded because of

Defendants’ outrageous conduct in violation of Zeng’s human rights, all of which has impacted

her well-being and the quality of her life.

53. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ retaliatory conduct complained of

herein, Zeng has suffered damages, injuries and losses, both actual and prospective, which include

the loss of her job and the emotional pain and suffering she has been caused to suffer and continues

9 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 11 ofNYSCEF:
RECEIVED 14 10/24/2023
11/29/2023

to suffer, all of which Zeng alleges to be in the amount of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000)

54. Here, Defendants’ conduct towards Zeng shows that they acted with willful or

wanton negligence, or recklessness, or a conscious disregard of Zeng’s rights under the New York

City Human Rights Law, or that their unlawful actions against Zeng were so reckless as to amount

to a disregard of Zeng’s rights, so that in addition to all the damages inflicted upon Zeng and in

addition to all the measures of relief to which Zeng may properly be entitled herein, Defendants

should additionally be required to pay punitive damages as punishment for their discriminatory

conduct in the further amount of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000), in order to deter them and

others similarly situated from engaging in such conduct in the future.

55. Zeng, therefore, seeks judgment against Defendants on this Second Cause of

Action, including, among other things, for compensatory damages in the sum of Two Million

Dollars ($2,000,000), and the additional further sum of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) in

punitive damages, together with costs, pre-judgment interest and reasonable attorney’s fees on this

Cause of Action, making a total claim of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000).

AS FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF
ZENG AGAINST ELLENOFF FOR AIDING AND ABETTING
DISCRIMINATION & RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF
§8-107(6) OF THE NEW YORK CITY HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

56. Zeng repeats, re-alleges and incorporates in full paragraphs 1 through 55 of this

Complaint, as though fully set forth at length herein.

57. Should Ellenoff be determined to not be individually liable under Administrative

Code §8-107(a)(1) or §8-107(7) for any reason, then Ellenoff should be held personally liable for

aiding, abetting and compelling the discrimination and retaliation against Zeng, as more

specifically detailed in prior paragraphs of this Complaint, all of which are deemed a part hereof.

10 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 12 ofNYSCEF:
RECEIVED 14 10/24/2023
11/29/2023

58. As more specifically detailed in prior paragraphs of this Complaint, all of which

are deemed a part hereof, Ellenoff aided, abetted and compelled the discrimination and retaliation

against Zeng, so that, should he be deemed to have not been Zeng’s employer, he should be held

personally liable for unlawful aiding and abetting against Zeng in violation of §8-107(6) of the

New York City Human Rights Law, which states, inter alia:

It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for any person to aid,
abet, incite, compel or coerce the doing of any of the acts forbidden
under this chapter, or to attempt to do so.

59. Ellenoff aided and abetted EGS to engage in the conduct complained of and, as a

direct result, Zeng has and will continue to suffer, among other things, a significant loss of income

and benefits, emotional injuries, as well as other losses associated with the effects of Zeng’s

conduct upon Zeng’s employment, career and life’s normal pursuits.

60. As a direct and proximate result of Ellenoff ’s violation of the New York City

Human Rights Law, Ellenoff is individually liable to Zeng pursuant to §8-502(a) of said statute

for damages and pursuant to §8-502(f) of said statute for “costs and reasonable attorney’s fees,”

as has been judicially established.

61. As a direct and proximate result of Ellenoff’s conduct complained of herein, Zeng

has suffered damages, injuries and losses, both actual and prospective, which include financial

loss, damage to her career and emotional pain and suffering, so that Zeng seeks in this Third Cause

of Action compensatory damages in the amount of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000).

62. Here, Ellenoff’s conduct towards Zeng shows that he acted with willful or wanton

negligence, or recklessness, or a conscious disregard of Zeng’s rights under the New York City

Human Rights Law, or that his unlawful actions against Zeng were so reckless as to amount to a

disregard of Zeng’s rights, so that in addition to all the damages inflicted upon Zeng and in addition

11 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. Case
1
9 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 Page 13 ofNYSCEF:
RECEIVED 14 10/24/2023
11/29/2023

to all the measure of relief to which Zeng may properly be entitled herein, Ellenoff should

additionally be required to pay punitive damages as punishment for his discriminatory and

retaliatory conduct in the further amount of Three Million ($3,000,000) Dollars, in order to deter

Ellenoff and others similarly situated from engaging in such conduct in the future.

63. Zeng, therefore, seeks compensatory damages on this Third Cause of Action,

including, among other things, the emotional harm inflicted upon her in the sum of Two Million

($2,000,000) Dollars, and an additional and further sum of Three Million ($3,000,000) Dollars for

punitive damages, making a total of Five Million ($5,000,000) Dollars in this third cause of action,

plus prejudgment interest, the costs of this action, as well as reasonable attorney’s fees.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Ming Zeng demands judgment against Defendants Ellenoff

Grossman & Schole LLP and Douglas S. Ellenoff on each of the First and Second Causes of Action

in the sum of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) in compensatory damages and the additional and

further sum of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) in punitive damages; and in the alternative on

the Third Cause of Action against Defendant Douglass S. Ellenoff in the sum of Two Million

Dollars ($2,000,000) in compensatory damages and the further and additional sum of Three

Million Dollars ($3,000,000) in punitive damages, for a total of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000);

plus, on all Causes of Action, pre-judgment interest, the costs of this action and reasonable

attorney’s fees, and for such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.

SCHWARTZ PERRY & HELLER, LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiff

By:__________________________
BRIAN HELLER
DAVIDA S. PERRY
3 Park Avenue, Suite 2700
New York, NY 10016
(212) 889-6565

12 of 13
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023
10/24/2023 09:15
04:52 AM
PM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
Case
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC Document 10-2 Filed 11/28/23 RECEIVED
9 Page 14 of 14
NYSCEF: 10/24/2023
11/29/2023

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
----X
MING ZENG,

Plaintiff,

-against- VERIFICATION

ELLENOFF GROSSMAN & SCHOLE LLP and
DOUGLASS. ELLENOFF,

Defendants.
---------------------X
STATE OF NEW YORK )
)ss.
COUNTY OF NEW YORK )

MING ZENG, being duly sworn, says:

I am the Plaintiff in the within action; I have read the foregoing Complaint and know the

contents thereof; the same is true to my knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be

alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true.

Sworn to me this 2.~
day of Octo r 2023

NOT
INA
c • State of New York
01OS6-437217
tn QuNns County
M on Expires Au11 1, 2026

13 of 13
Scanned with CamScanner
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2023 09:15 AM INDEX NO. 160393/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9Case 1:23-cv-10348-JGLC

Case Info

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

November 29, 2023

Case Filing Date

October 24, 2023

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Document for Ming Zeng v. Ellenoff Grossman & Schole Llp, Douglas S. Ellenoff

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties