Long Island City, New York – The Dugger Law Firm, PLLC has filed an amended federal complaint (Levine v. CUNY, No. 1:26-cv-01859) adding fifteen individual defendants and three plaintiffs to a proposed class action challenging disability accommodation and leave practices at the City University of New York.
The lawsuit now includes eight current and former faculty and staff members from six CUNY colleges. Their amended complaint alleges that CUNY and other defendants denied or delayed accommodations, made repeated medical-documentation demands and engaged in retaliation. The plaintiffs allege resulting harms including lost pay, depleted leave and job loss.
The amended complaint was filed on October 22, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The action was originally filed on March 29, 2026.
This release describes allegations and requests for relief in the filed amended complaint, not court findings. Plaintiffs ask the court to certify the proposed classes. Filing the complaint does not certify a class. Defendants may contest the allegations and requested relief.
Fifteen additional individual defendants
The amended complaint continues to name CUNY, its Board of Trustees, the City of New York and Chancellor Felix V. Matos Rodríguez as defendants. The Chancellor, previously sued only in his official capacity, is now also sued in his individual capacity.
The amendment adds fifteen individual defendants: Ronnie Ursin, Linda Washington-Brown, Anthony E. Munroe, Suzanne M. Miller, Victor Humphrey, Sandra C. Gordon, Patricia A. Cody, Justin Vázquez-Poritz, Patrick Corbett, Gila Rohr, Avery Mullen, Blerina Likollari, Sandy Lujan, Dori J. Rubin and Tanya Myers. Each is sued in an individual capacity. The allegations, claims and requested remedies vary by plaintiff and defendant.
Challenged practices across six colleges
The eight plaintiffs are current or former employees of Queensborough Community College, Borough of Manhattan Community College, Kingsborough Community College, Hostos Community College, the College of Staten Island and New York City College of Technology.
The complaint challenges alleged failures to accommodate disabilities, rigid onsite requirements, repeated medical reviews and accommodation approvals allegedly left unimplemented. Several plaintiffs allege that existing online courses, digital systems or remote arrangements would have allowed them to continue performing their duties with effective accommodations.
Expanded proposed classes address repeated medical demands, remote-work barriers and retaliation
The amended complaint adds a proposed subclass for employees who, according to the complaint, were required to obtain renewed provider certification of permanent or chronic conditions when an approval period ended, without an identified change in their condition, duties or requested accommodation, or a deficiency in existing documentation. A separate proposed subclass challenges semester-by-semester and other fixed, non-individualized approval limits despite documented longer-term needs.
Another new proposed subclass concerns alleged failures to implement written approval for fully remote work, including subsequent onsite assignments or withheld teaching workload based on required physical presence. A separate proposed subclass challenges an alleged categorical refusal to consider disability-related commuting limitations when evaluating remote-work requests.
One new proposed class concerns employees who previously received remote-work disability accommodations in the same positions after February 28, 2022, but whose later written, medically supported requests remained pending without approval for more than sixty consecutive days, even though no equipment needed to be ordered.
Additional proposed classes challenge alleged paperwork barriers, including requiring designated medical forms despite existing provider documentation without identifying missing information, and requiring providers to identify an essential job function an employee cannot perform before considering an accommodation request. Another proposed class concerns medical-release provisions combined with hold-harmless agreements covering those supplying medical information, which plaintiffs allege were presented for signature without informing employees of alternative ways to substantiate their requests.
The lawsuit also retains proposed classes addressing remote-work denials, accommodation delays and disability-accommodation leave requests allegedly diverted into other procedures. Its proposed remote-accommodation retaliation class addresses alleged forced leave, lost pay, reduced assignments, termination and non-reappointment within sixty days of specified accommodation-related activity. Its proposed Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) retaliation class concerns qualifying employees notified of, or subjected to, termination or non-reappointment within sixty days of requesting, using or receiving approval for qualifying FMLA leave. A new proposed community-college class challenges categorical onsite-attendance and one-in-person-course requirements allegedly applied instead of individualized accommodation review.
Altogether, the amendment expands the proposed class structure from eight to nineteen classes and subclasses. The proposed groups encompass qualifying current and former non-managerial CUNY employees beyond the six colleges represented by the named plaintiffs. The proposed class period begins March 29, 2023, subject to each group’s specific membership requirements. Plaintiffs seek court orders changing the challenged practices. The classes remain proposed, and the allegations are not court findings.
Three additional plaintiffs
Dean DeRenzo, who worked at the College of Staten Island for approximately ten years, alleges that his previously approved remote work was reduced and onsite arrangements did not address his mobility limitations. According to the complaint, he received a notice terminating his employment effective immediately on June 30, 2026, seven days after filing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge and five days after requesting an internal investigation. He alleges that the termination was retaliatory.
Cia Kessler, an instructional designer who helps faculty design courses, develop online learning materials, and use digital teaching tools at Kingsborough Community College, alleges that a temporary schedule allowing two remote days per week did not meet her disability-related needs. She initially requested three remote days and later sought five, providing additional medical support for the new request. She alleges that her work largely involved digital faculty support and instructional design, yet she was forced to use sick leave during periods when she could have worked remotely had the college approved the requested arrangement.
Bonnie Miles, a Borough of Manhattan Community College office assistant at the Manhattan Educational Opportunity Center, alleges that the college’s human resources office required renewed paperwork after approximately three years under an approved hybrid schedule. The complaint states that her schedule allowing three remote days per week was renewed effective August 31, 2026, but that requests for scheduling flexibility, symptom-management breaks and meeting access remained unresolved. She also alleges interference with approved leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act.
The five original plaintiffs
Robin Levine, who worked at Queensborough Community College for more than twenty years, alleges that officials denied additional remote work during her recovery from surgery, despite her successful performance of Registrar’s Office duties remotely in earlier periods. According to the complaint, she sought two additional remote days per week for approximately six remaining summer weeks. She alleges that the denial and directive to return onsite forced her retirement in August 2023.
Noreen Mulvanerty, a former assistant professor of pediatric nursing at Borough of Manhattan Community College, alleges that officials failed to provide a full teaching workload compatible with her approved remote-work accommodation, despite available remote assignments. She alleges that officials then relied on the resulting workload shortfall and her absence from hospital clinical work in denying her reappointment. She also alleges that officials declined to consider additional medical leave as a disability accommodation, although she received unprotected non-FMLA medical leave.
Shavone Sease, a longtime Kingsborough Community College Registrar’s Office employee, alleges repeated express and constructive denials of disability accommodations, including fully remote work, an effective enclosed workspace, and modified hours. She alleges that proposed onsite measures were inadequate and that fully remote work was denied despite her demonstrated ability to perform scheduling and related duties remotely through existing college systems. The complaint identifies a 106-day review of her modified-schedule request, a separate 97-day wait for an accommodation-appeal decision, and a renewed remote-work request that remained unresolved for at least 106 days, from July 2 through October 16, 2026. She alleges that, while awaiting requested disability accommodations, she remained required to work onsite under conditions that aggravated her disabilities or use leave instead.
Malik Sullivan, a former Registrar’s Office employee at Hostos Community College, alleges that the college denied his request for six months of fully remote work despite his prior successful remote work during the pandemic. He alleges that the modified hours and partial remote-work schedules he received provided some benefit but did not adequately address his disability-related limitations. He further alleges that his March 27, 2023 request for additional disability-related medical leave remained pending when he received a non-reappointment notice on March 29, 2023. He alleges disability discrimination and retaliation related to his accommodation and FMLA leave requests and discrimination complaints.
Lucas Kwong, a tenured associate professor of English at New York City College of Technology, alleges prolonged delays and restrictions on disability-related remote teaching and other faculty duties. Although he eventually received remote-teaching relief, the complaint alleges constructive accommodation denials, including a 65-day wait for a fully asynchronous teaching schedule and a 143-day wait before partial teaching relief. He further alleges that requests to perform peer observations, attend meetings, and fulfill other service duties remotely were denied or remained unresolved. He also challenges as unlawful semester-by-semester reapplication and renewed medical-documentation requirements despite his documented permanent conditions, and alleges that City Tech required closure of his internal discrimination complaint during his accommodation appeal, although later refiling was permitted.
CASE INFORMATION
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Levine et al v. The City University of New York et al.
Case No. al 1:26-cv-01859
Case File: Filed Amended Complaint (PDF)
The Dugger Law Firm, PLLC represents employees in employment discrimination and wage-and-hour matters, including class and collective actions.
The Dugger Law Firm, PLLC
Gotham Center 28-07 Jackson Ave., 5th Fl. Long Island City, NY 11101
646) 560-3208
[email protected]
https://www.theduggerlawfirm.com/
Press Contact : Cyrus Dugger
Distributed by Law Firm Newswire
