A former Bayonne employee has refiled a lawsuit alleging racketeering and corruption in Essex County Superior Court about 11 months after filing in federal court.
Rich Roszkowski. Facebook photo.
By John Heinis/Hudson County View
Former Bayonne Fire Prevention Clerk Rich Roszkowski filed a new five-count complaint in Essex County Superior Court yesterday, which expands upon the lawsuit he filed last year, Public court filings do not explain why the federal case never moved forward.
The latest lawsuit still names then-Business Administrator Donna Russo, Fire Chief Keith Weaver, Police Capt. William Dundas, and the City of Bayonne as defendants, revolving around Roszkowski’s alleged wrongful arrest in 2022 and termination in 2024.
“After having to retained Criminal Defense Counsel, the criminal matter was dismissed with prejudiced, for lack of evidence, on March 29, 2023 by the Hudson County Prosecutor,” according to the lawsuit, where the former public employe is representing himself.
“Plaintiff Roszkowski requested reinstatement to his employment; Defendants City of Bayonne, and Russo refused to reinstate Plaintiff with back pay. A second PNDA was issued October 30, 2023. A FNDA was issued on November 14, 2024. Plaintiff was terminated on November 14, 2024.”
The court filing continues that Dundas and Russo conspired to have him arrested on bogus charges on October 25th, 2022, causing irreparable harm to his employment and reputation, which Roszkowski goes on to say was a form retaliation and harassment.
” … Although plaintiff complained about Individual Defendant Russo’s harassment and availed himself of the employer-provided avenue for handling harassment complaints, City of Bayonne failed to take appropriate measures,” the suit says.
“There is a pattern and practice of misusing the authority, creating false narratives, providing false documents. Ultimately, when Plaintiff was cleared of the bogus charges, in retaliation the Defendants terminated Plaintiff in November 2024.”
Further, he says that his constitutional rights were violated by being arrested and imprisoned for a summons, as well as that a hostile work environment was made possible by Weaver giving Russo the authority to oversee and control his department.
Roszkowski also elaborates on what he contends was a widespread fraudulent conspiracy against him for not going along with conduct he felt to be unethical and/or illegal.
“Defendant Donna Russo, along with other city officials including but not limited to Mayor James Davis, used their power and influence of their municipal offices to coerce private parties into paying contractors with whom they had financial and business associations by issuing formal legal demands, invoking the authority of the City, and asserting that payment was required and subject to municipal enforcement,” he wrote in the lawsuit.
“By leveraging her official position, legal authority, and the implied threat of governmental action, defendant Russo applied pressure to compel payment in matters that were otherwise private civil disputes, thereby securing financial benefit for associated contractors. Their official actions and authority facilitated work and transactions that generated associated financial gain and economic advantage to her, other officials and her affiliated parties.”
He goes on to say that Russo either facilitated or authorized the demolition of certain properties – which involved falsifying records – so that a client of hers, who is not named, could acquire nearby properties “under distressed and non-competitive conditions.”
Additionally, Roszkowski says, through the suit, that these practices are a clear example of official misconduct, as well as insurance fraud, since insurance carriers never had “a reasonable opportunity” to conduct inspections to assess coverage.
“Individual Defendant Donna Russo knowingly used her official position and influence to cause the unlawful restraint and arrest of a resident who challenged her demolition demands and enforcement actions,” according to the court filing.
“After attempting to initiate criminal charges through the County Prosecutor’s Office without success, Russo used her authority and influence within the Municipal Court to interfere with proper notice procedures, resulting in the withholding or delay of court notifications and the issuance of a bench warrant for failure to appear at a hearing the resident had not been properly informed of.”
He continues that this is a pattern of abuse by the defendants to punish and abuse anyone who interferes with their racketeering and/or criminal actions.
“Through their control over municipal processes and internal approvals, Russo and participating officials ensured that applications associated with preferred parties received
accelerated review, favorable determinations, and relief from regulatory obstacles, while others were subjected to delays or enforcement actions,” the lawsuit asserts.
“This manipulation of official municipal functions for financial and political benefit
constituted a misuse of public office and authority to secure improper financial advantage for affiliated individuals and entities. This coordinated conduct, carried out with the knowledge and participation of other municipal officials, constituted a systematic misuse of governmental authority and judicial process to secure financial benefit for associated private parties.”
Roszkowski’s initial lawsuit sought $1.8 million, while this one does not name a specific dollar amount.
Nonetheless, he outlines he is seeking compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages, as well as compensation for mental anguish, damages for breach of contract and the bad faith claim, injunctive relief preventing the city from doing business illegally, costs and legal fees of the suit, along with any relief the court deems just and equitable.
“It is our long-standing policy not to comment on pending legal matters,” city spokesman Joe Ryan told HCV.