BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 1 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

Marc A. Rapaport, NJ Attorney ID Number: 053691992

RAPAPORT LAW FIRM, PLLC
80 Eighth Avenue, Suite 206
New York, NY 10011
Ph: (212) 382-1600
mrapaport@rapaportlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

----------------------------------------------------X
MICHAEL MANCUSO, : SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
: LAW DIVISION: BURLINGTON COUNTY
:
Plaintiff, : Docket No.:
:
-against- : COMPLAINT, JURY DEMAND,
: DESIGNATION OF TRIAL COUNSEL
: AND R. 4:5-1 CERTIFICATION
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE :
and NFL PRODUCTONS, LLC, :
:
:
Defendants. :
----------------------------------------------------X

Plaintiff, Michael Mancuso (“Mancuso” or “Plaintiff”), by and through his

attorneys, Rapaport Law Firm, PLLC, as and for his Complaint in this action against the

National Football League (“NFL”) and NFL Productions, LLC, (“NFL Productions”)

(collectively, “Defendants”) alleges as follows:

NATURE OF THE CLAIMS

1. This is a civil action to redress Defendants’ unlawful employment

practices against Plaintiff in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination

(NJLAD), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to 42 by: a) subjecting Plaintiff to a hostile work environment

based on his disability and/or the perception of that he was disabled; b) subjecting

Plaintiff to adverse terms and conditions of employment based on his having tested

positive for COVID-19; and c) terminating Plaintiff in retaliation for his complaints to his
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 2 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

managers regarding a hostile work environment based on disability and/or the perception

of disability.

THE PARTIES

2. Plaintiff is an individual and a former employee of the Defendants.

Plaintiff resides at 30 Schuyler Lane, Garrison, New York 10524.

3. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Plaintiff was a “covered

employee” and or an “employee” of Defendants under all relevant statutes.

4. Upon information and belief, the NFL is an unincorporated association

with offices at 345 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10065.

5. Upon information and belief, NFL Productions is a corporation duly

organized under the laws of the State of Delaware, and it operates broadcast studios at 4

World Trade Center in New York City, and a supporting control room at 1 Sabol Way,

Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054 (the “Mount Laurel Facility”), where Plaintiff worked.

6. The NFL and NFL Productions are, independently and/or collectively,

“covered employers” and/or an “employers” under all relevant statutes.

BACKGROUND

7. Commencing in or about May 2018 through on or about June 22, 2021,

Plaintiff worked as a VizRT technician at the Mount Laurel Facility.

8. Plaintiff was among a group of technicians who worked for Defendants in

connection with the production and broadcasting of Defendants’ popular morning

program, Good Morning Football (the “Show” or “GMFB”).

9. Upon information and belief, GMFB is one of the NFL’s most widely

watched programs, and it is broadcasted nationally on the NFL Network.

2
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 3 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

10. GMFB airs for three hours every weekday beginning at 7:00 a.m. ET., re-

airs at 10:00 a.m., and it is also available on radio and as a podcast.

11. GMFB’s on-air hosts include some of the most popular personalities in

sports, including former professional NFL players, as well as prominent individuals in the

entertainment world.

12. GMFB has been described as:

something like morning announcements for what would be the weirdest

high school in America. Good Morning Football is both about the NFL
culture and a part of it.

https://www.si.com/media/2018/08/23/good-morning-football-nfl-network-ratings-

popularity. (accessed on January 8, 2022).

13. Upon information and belief, the NFL and its affiliates have been the

subject of repeated investigations that have found a longstanding culture of pervasive

workplace bullying and retaliation, inconsistent application of personnel policies, and

instances when employees who voiced complaints regarding bullying and discrimination

faced adverse consequences in the workplace.

14. Upon information and belief, the NFL has long been on notice that its

locker-room culture has led to widespread bullying and, in the words of the New York

Times, even the NFL’s professional athletes have been subjected to “indignities straight

from the hallways of high school or back rooms of fraternity houses.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/05/sports/football/for-the-nfl-a-question-of-hazing-

or-abuse.html (accessed on January 8, 2022).

15. The foregoing virus of workplace mockery and intimidation infects the

media and broadcast operations of the NFL, including at the Mount Laurel Facility.

3
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 4 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS RELATING TO DEFENDANTS’ ACTS

OF DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION AGAINST PLAINTIFF

(a) Hostile Work Environment and Retaliation Against Plaintiff For His
Complaints.

16. Plaintiff began working as a VizRT operator at the Mount Laurel Facility

in approximately May 2018.

17. Throughout Plaintiff’s employment at the Mount Laurel Control Room,

Plaintiff worked alongside and in close collaboration with GMFB’s directors.

18. Plaintiff would report to work each weekday morning at 4:00 a.m. From

4:00 a.m. to approximately 7:00 a.m., Plaintiff created and produced graphics for each

morning’s show. GMFB went live from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. During the Show,

Plaintiff would edit and run graphics in real-time based on instructions from the GMFB’s

director and producer.

19. Plaintiff experienced a work environment where locker-room bullying,

including mockery of Plaintiff, was tolerated, even after this conduct was brought to the

attention of management by Plaintiff.

20. On or about January 28, 2021, the Show ran a segment featuring defensive

tackle DaQuan Jones, who is currently with the Carolina Panthers. During a commercial

break that immediately preceded the DaQuan Jones segment, the Show’s Director and

Associate Director mocked DaQuan Jones’ obesity.

21. The foregoing exchange was audible to everyone wearing a headset,

including Plaintiff. The Director and Associate Director next turned their mockery and

ridicule toward Plaintiff, with one of them asking the other, “who does [Jones] look like.”

4
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 5 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

After several sarcastic exchanges, one of them referred to “Viz. 3” (Plaintiff), at which

point both of them began laughing.

22. On other occasions, a co-worker of Plaintiff was openly referred to as

“Mr. Molasses.”

23. Plaintiff had a series of meetings with management at which Plaintiff

raised the issue of the foregoing degrading comments and bullying in the workplace.

24. The foregoing discussions continued, on and off, through March 2021.

25. Plaintiff was specifically directed to bring any complaints and/or concerns,

as well as any relevant information, to his managers, Eddie Sheridan (“Sheridan”) and

senior manager, Steve Silver (“Silver”), rather than with Human Resources.

26. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff’s complaints were disregarded.

Instead of taking Plaintiff’s concerns seriously, Silver and Sheridan insinuated that

Plaintiff was not being a “team player.” They conceded that there was bullying and

mockery in the workplace, but brushed off Plaintiff’s plea that this abuse be remedied.

27. Plaintiff, by virtue of having raised issues concerning mistreatment, was

viewed less favorably.

28. In retaliation for having raised concerns about hostility in the workplace,

Plaintiff was terminated effective June 25, 2021.

(b) Adverse Treatment of Plaintiff Based on His Having Tested Positive

for COVID-19.

29. On or about December 10, 2020, Plaintiff learned that he had tested

positive for COVID-19.

5
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 6 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

30. Plaintiff immediately informed human resources personnel responsible for

the Mount Laurel Control Room of his positive status and that he was required to

quarantine until December 28, 2020.

31. Plaintiff reported to work on the morning of December 28, 2020.

32. The following day, December 29, 2020, Plaintiff received a telephone call

from Sheridan, a manager of the Mount Laurel Control Room. Sheridan informed

Plaintiff that managers were disappointed with Plaintiff for his not having handled VizRT

work for the NFL’s Good Morning Football show on Christmas Day.

33. Plaintiff responded that he had been unable to work on Christmas Day

because of his mandatory quarantine, and that at the beginning of his leave, he had

explicitly communicated to Human Resources that his return-to-work date was after

Christmas, to wit: on December 28, 2020.

34. During the same December 29th telephone call, Sheridan informed

Plaintiff that Plaintiff would be the only full-time VizRT technician/operator who would

not be provided with VizRT equipment to facilitate working from home.

35. Sheridan told Plaintiff that Plaintiff was being deprived of VizRT

equipment (and, therefore, the flexibility and convenience of working from home)

specifically because Plaintiff had recently been infected with COVID-19.

36. By depriving Plaintiff of the foregoing VizRT equipment, Defendants

caused Plaintiff to suffer disadvantageous and unequal work conditions.

37. Other, similarly situated workers who had not recently tested positive for

COVID-19 were provided the convenience, flexibility and safety of performing various

aspects of their jobs from home. This unequal treatment placed Plaintiff at a significant

6
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 7 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

disadvantage relative to his co-workers including, inter alia, making it easier for co-

workers to quickly respond to inquiries and requests relating to future shows.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination
Hostile Work Environment

38. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1

through 37 with the same force and effect as if set forth at length herein.

39. Plaintiff suffers from obesity relating to systemic, underlying medical

conditions, and he qualifies as disabled and/or he was perceived as disabled.

40. During the course of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants, the actions

and/or omissions of supervisory personnel of Defendants, as described above, created and

maintained a hostile work environment on the basis of Plaintiff’s disability and/or the

perception that Plaintiff was disabled.

41. Defendants had a duty to prevent the foregoing harassment and to address

Plaintiff’s complaints regarding the discrimination against him.

42. However, Defendants knowingly, recklessly and/or negligently failed to

prevent the hostile work environment and discrimination and, indeed, retaliated against

Plaintiff after he complained, ultimately terminating him as a result of his complaints.

43. The conduct of Defendants thus constituted unlawful discrimination and

retaliation against Plaintiff in violation of New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination,

N.J.S.A. 10:5-1, et seq. As a direct and proximate result thereof, Plaintiff has been and

continues to be damaged.

7
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 8 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination
Retaliation

44. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1

through 43 with the same force and effect as if set forth at length herein.

45. Defendants retaliated against Plaintiff as set forth above for his objections

to discriminatory ridicule in the workplace.

46. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful retaliatory

conduct, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, monetary and/or economic

damages, including, but not limited to, loss of past and future income, compensation and

benefits for which he is entitled to an award of monetary damages and other relief.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Adverse Treatment of Plaintiff Because of His Infection with COVID-19

47. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraph 1

through 46 with the same force and effect as it set forth at length herein.

48. Defendants violated their duties under the New Jersey Law Against

Discrimination by refusing to provide Plaintiff with the flexibility, convenience and

advantage of working from home, solely because Plaintiff had recently been infected

with COVID-19.

49. The foregoing, adverse treatment made it more difficult for Plaintiff,

relative to other personnel who had not recently been infected, to perform his job duties.

50. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful and

discriminatory conduct, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, monetary and/or

economic damages, including his loss of past and future income, compensation and

benefits for which he is entitled to an award of monetary damages and other relief.

8
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 9 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

51. Defendants’ supervisory personnel were aware of, approved of, ratified

and/or participated in the unequal treatment of Plaintiff.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Michael Mancuso, respectfully requests that this Court enter

a Judgment in his favor and against Defendants, the National Football League and NFL

Productions, LLC for:

a) An award of damages in an amount to be determined at trial to

compensate Plaintiff for all monetary and/or economic damages, including but not

limited to, the loss of past or future income, wages, compensation and other benefits of

employment;

b) An award of punitive damages;

c) An award of any and all other monetary and/or non-monetary losses

suffered by Plaintiff in an amount to be determined at trial;

d) An award for statutory and punitive damages;

e) An award for all costs that Plaintiff has incurred in this action, as well as

Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fee to the fullest extent permitted by law;

f) An award of pre-judgment interest on all amounts due; and

g) Such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

RAPAPORT LAW FIRM, PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

By: ________________________
Marc A. Rapaport

Dated: January 10, 2022

9
 BUR-L-000101-22 01/10/2022 4:45:26 PM Pg 10 of 10 Trans ID: LCV2022103476

DESIGNATION OF TRIAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 4:25-1(b)(14)

Marc A. Rapaport is hereby designated as trial counsel.

RAPAPORT LAW FIRM, PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

By: ________________________
Marc A. Rapaport
Dated: January 10, 2022

JURY DEMAD

Plaintiff demands a trial by a jury on all three accounts so triable.

RAPAPORT LAW FIRM, PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

By: ________________________
Marc A. Rapaport
Dated: January 10, 2022

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 4:5-1

I certify that the matter in controversy is not the subject of any other action

pending in any court or pending in any arbitration proceeding and that no such action or

arbitration proceeding is contemplated. To plaintiff’s knowledge, no other party should

be joined in this action.

RAPAPORT LAW FIRM, PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

By: ________________________
Marc A. Rapaport
Dated: January 10, 2022

10