Kenya McNeill, who worked as a "Yss" at the Office of Children and Family Services' Taberg Residential Center for Girls in Taberg, New York, sued the agency pro se alleging race discrimination, a hostile work environment, retaliation, and disability discrimination after he was fired in June 2024 — described in the complaint as a second termination. The Taberg facility houses girls aged 13 to 18 who have been adjudicated juvenile delinquents.
McNeill's complaint described a prolonged series of workplace conflicts beginning in May 2023, including a coworker he said repeatedly undermined his authority with residents, a supervisor who told him there were no hours for him on his shift shortly after a resident made an allegation against him, and a colleague, YC1 Jaime Murphy, who told him he was a dead man walking — a remark Murphy said referred to a character from The Green Mile. McNeill also alleged a workplace injury in March 2024, a sequence involving shifting findings on a resident allegation, and a termination letter from assistant director Houghton in June 2024 stating his services were no longer needed.
U.S. District Judge Elizabeth C. Coombe, sitting in the Northern District of New York, held that the complaint failed on all four claims because it did not connect any of the alleged adverse actions to McNeill's membership in a protected class. On the Title VII discrimination claim, the court held that while the complaint suggested McNeill is a Black man, it did not allege that comparator employees — including the coworker whose conduct McNeill described at length — were outside his protected class, making it impossible to infer disparate treatment based on race. The remark about being a dead man walking, the court held, could not support an inference of discriminatory motive because the complaint did not allege that Murphy was a supervisor, had any authority over McNeill, or played any role in the termination decision.
The hostile work environment and retaliation claims failed for the same core reason: the complaint described workplace misconduct but did not allege that any of it was motivated by discriminatory animus tied to a protected characteristic. The complaint did allege a continued pattern of unwelcome behavior from coworkers identified as Caucasian, but the court held that the complaint did not allege facts permitting an inference that those actions were motivated by discriminatory animus because of any protected characteristics. On retaliation, the court held that McNeill's complaint to the EEOC about harassment and discrimination at the Taberg facility did not identify the substance of that complaint, and his internal complaints similarly did not allege that the conduct he reported was discriminatory because of any protected characteristic.
The ADA claims — which the court read into the complaint sua sponte based on McNeill's references to a disability and a failure to provide reasonable accommodations — were dismissed because the complaint did not identify any impairment or explain how it substantially limited a major life activity.
Judge Coombe declined to consider additional factual allegations McNeill raised in his opposition brief, noting that a court evaluating a motion to dismiss is limited to the allegations in the complaint itself. Because a liberal reading of the complaint suggested a valid claim might be stated, the court granted leave to amend and directed McNeill to file an amended complaint within 30 days, include all factual allegations in that pleading, identify each individual's role and responsibilities, and reattach his EEOC right-to-sue letter. Failure to file within the deadline will result in the case being closed.