Documentation to "My Case"
Saturday, July 28, 2007
-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------- X
TIBOR GASPARIK,
.............................................................................................................. CV-05-03817 (SJF)
Plaintiff,
-against-
.......................................................................................................... STATEMENT PURSUANT
STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY
.......................................................................................................... TO LOCAL RULE 56.1
Defendant.
------------------------------------------------------- X
Plaintiff pro se, TIBOR GASPARIK, submits, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1, the following statement of material facts, in which he contends that there exists a genuine issue to be tried:
1. Plaintiff was employed from April 1, 1985, to January 31, 2002, as Lab Manager and Research Associate Professor at the Department of Geosciences, Stony Brook University.
2. Plaintiff has always received the highest evaluations and performed research at the levels that could be rated among the best in the world by any standards of scholarly achievement. This was summarized in the document: “Credentials and Accomplishments” (Exhibit “B” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration, with the supporting documentation: E 61-100).
3. However, for most of his employment, Plaintiff was subject to a series of hostile actions by his superiors, employees of the University, with the clear intention of making his work difficult and life miserable and thus to force him to leave the employment. This was summarized in the document: “Account of my Persecution” (Exhibit “A” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration, with the supporting documentation: E 1-60).
4. When these actions failed, Plaintiff was dismissed on January 31, 2002, in gross violation of his true seniority status and under the excuse that “the project has ended” (E-28).
5. Yet, despite being the most senior and most valuable and accomplished scientist among all scientists participating in the project, and could be rated as one of the best faculty members (E-29/1, 29/2), Plaintiff was the only one dismissed under this excuse.
6. Although Plaintiff retained his position as Research Associate Professor at the Department of Geosciences, the University would not consider him for any employment that could provide a salary.
7. Attempts to secure research funding and salary from the National Science Foundation (NSF) were sabotaged by his former superiors at the Department (E-33). This has also become evident from the fact that the NSF stopped sending him research proposal for review immediately following the dismissal (E-35).
8. Plaintiff’s complaints to the Provost (E-38) and President (E-40, E-52) of the Stony Brook University were stonewalled.
9. To obtain an alternative source of income, Plaintiff completed at the same University a Masters of Art in Teaching (MAT) degree in Earth Science in May 2005, and hoped to start a new career as secondary school teacher (E-63).
10. Plaintiff was promised a leave of replacement position at Ralph G. Reed Middle School in Central Islip, following completion of all requirements and satisfactory performance as student teacher between March and May 2005 (Exhibit “C” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration).
11. The University promised to expedite the certification process following satisfactory completion of all requirements. Instead, the University delayed issuing a letter to that effect, which resulted in the loss of this employment opportunity (Exhibit “C”).
12. When Plaintiff posted in June 2005 a Web site summarizing his persecution, the University and the Department retaliated, in violation of the First Amendment, by taking his name off the list of faculty members posted on the departmental Web site, and ordered him to vacate his office (E-59).
13. Because this action made it extremely difficult or nearly impossible for Plaintiff to continue in his efforts to secure research funding, further contribute to the advancement of science, and restart his former career as scientist and professor, he was forced to seek justice through the legal system and filed a complaint at the United States District Court in Central Islip on August 11, 2005 (E-60).
14. For many years Plaintiff searched in vain for an explanation for the startling discrepancy between his superior performance and accomplishments as a scientist (Exhibit “B”), and the indifferent or hostile behavior by his colleagues at the Department of Geosciences (Exhibit “A”). Several of his colleagues at the Department devoted extraordinary amounts of time and effort to a single goal: forcing him to leave.
15. In the last few years, it has become obvious that most universities and colleges in the United States discriminate against conservative professors in hiring, retention and promotion. This was summarized in the document “Discrimination in Academia: End of 2006 Review” (Exhibit ”D” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration, with the supporting documentation: Links 1-70).
16. This fact is based on, by now, overwhelming evidence from surveys (Links 1, 2, 5, 7, 13, 32), voter registration records (Link 8), voting records (Link 4) and political donations (Links 63, 64).
17. Stony Brook University has a record of belonging to more extreme of the institutions of higher education in its liberal policies and liberal bias. For example, only 18% of the university employees voted for President Bush in the last presidential elections on November 2, 2004 (Link 4).
18. Plaintiff has never tried to hide his conservative views nor his record of voting for Republican candidates, but cannot name any faculty member or other university professor who is not a liberal. In fact, Plaintiff believes that all faculty members at the Department are registered Democrats.
19. Plaintiff does not even have the option of pretending to be a liberal, because it is widely known among his peers in the scientific community that he is a refugee from communism, therefore, labeled and blacklisted as anti-communist; in fact, he is a registered Republican.
20. Plaintiff believes that his political orientation was the sole reason for the acts of persecution by his colleagues at the Department of Geosciences and by the University administrators, and for the termination of his employment.
Dated: Holtsville, New York
January 12, 2007
_____________________________
Tibor Gasparik
Plaintiff pro se, and
Research Associate Professor
352 Plad Blvd
Holtsville, New York 11742
(631) 447-2168
TO: Lori L. Pack
Office of the Attorney General
300 Motor Parkway
Suite 205
Hauppauge, NY 11788
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------- X
TIBOR GASPARIK,
.............................................................................................................. CV-05-03817 (SJF)
Plaintiff,
-against-
.......................................................................................................... STATEMENT PURSUANT
STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY
.......................................................................................................... TO LOCAL RULE 56.1
Defendant.
------------------------------------------------------- X
Plaintiff pro se, TIBOR GASPARIK, submits, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1, the following statement of material facts, in which he contends that there exists a genuine issue to be tried:
1. Plaintiff was employed from April 1, 1985, to January 31, 2002, as Lab Manager and Research Associate Professor at the Department of Geosciences, Stony Brook University.
2. Plaintiff has always received the highest evaluations and performed research at the levels that could be rated among the best in the world by any standards of scholarly achievement. This was summarized in the document: “Credentials and Accomplishments” (Exhibit “B” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration, with the supporting documentation: E 61-100).
3. However, for most of his employment, Plaintiff was subject to a series of hostile actions by his superiors, employees of the University, with the clear intention of making his work difficult and life miserable and thus to force him to leave the employment. This was summarized in the document: “Account of my Persecution” (Exhibit “A” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration, with the supporting documentation: E 1-60).
4. When these actions failed, Plaintiff was dismissed on January 31, 2002, in gross violation of his true seniority status and under the excuse that “the project has ended” (E-28).
5. Yet, despite being the most senior and most valuable and accomplished scientist among all scientists participating in the project, and could be rated as one of the best faculty members (E-29/1, 29/2), Plaintiff was the only one dismissed under this excuse.
6. Although Plaintiff retained his position as Research Associate Professor at the Department of Geosciences, the University would not consider him for any employment that could provide a salary.
7. Attempts to secure research funding and salary from the National Science Foundation (NSF) were sabotaged by his former superiors at the Department (E-33). This has also become evident from the fact that the NSF stopped sending him research proposal for review immediately following the dismissal (E-35).
8. Plaintiff’s complaints to the Provost (E-38) and President (E-40, E-52) of the Stony Brook University were stonewalled.
9. To obtain an alternative source of income, Plaintiff completed at the same University a Masters of Art in Teaching (MAT) degree in Earth Science in May 2005, and hoped to start a new career as secondary school teacher (E-63).
10. Plaintiff was promised a leave of replacement position at Ralph G. Reed Middle School in Central Islip, following completion of all requirements and satisfactory performance as student teacher between March and May 2005 (Exhibit “C” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration).
11. The University promised to expedite the certification process following satisfactory completion of all requirements. Instead, the University delayed issuing a letter to that effect, which resulted in the loss of this employment opportunity (Exhibit “C”).
12. When Plaintiff posted in June 2005 a Web site summarizing his persecution, the University and the Department retaliated, in violation of the First Amendment, by taking his name off the list of faculty members posted on the departmental Web site, and ordered him to vacate his office (E-59).
13. Because this action made it extremely difficult or nearly impossible for Plaintiff to continue in his efforts to secure research funding, further contribute to the advancement of science, and restart his former career as scientist and professor, he was forced to seek justice through the legal system and filed a complaint at the United States District Court in Central Islip on August 11, 2005 (E-60).
14. For many years Plaintiff searched in vain for an explanation for the startling discrepancy between his superior performance and accomplishments as a scientist (Exhibit “B”), and the indifferent or hostile behavior by his colleagues at the Department of Geosciences (Exhibit “A”). Several of his colleagues at the Department devoted extraordinary amounts of time and effort to a single goal: forcing him to leave.
15. In the last few years, it has become obvious that most universities and colleges in the United States discriminate against conservative professors in hiring, retention and promotion. This was summarized in the document “Discrimination in Academia: End of 2006 Review” (Exhibit ”D” attached to Plaintiff’s Declaration, with the supporting documentation: Links 1-70).
16. This fact is based on, by now, overwhelming evidence from surveys (Links 1, 2, 5, 7, 13, 32), voter registration records (Link 8), voting records (Link 4) and political donations (Links 63, 64).
17. Stony Brook University has a record of belonging to more extreme of the institutions of higher education in its liberal policies and liberal bias. For example, only 18% of the university employees voted for President Bush in the last presidential elections on November 2, 2004 (Link 4).
18. Plaintiff has never tried to hide his conservative views nor his record of voting for Republican candidates, but cannot name any faculty member or other university professor who is not a liberal. In fact, Plaintiff believes that all faculty members at the Department are registered Democrats.
19. Plaintiff does not even have the option of pretending to be a liberal, because it is widely known among his peers in the scientific community that he is a refugee from communism, therefore, labeled and blacklisted as anti-communist; in fact, he is a registered Republican.
20. Plaintiff believes that his political orientation was the sole reason for the acts of persecution by his colleagues at the Department of Geosciences and by the University administrators, and for the termination of his employment.
Dated: Holtsville, New York
January 12, 2007
_____________________________
Tibor Gasparik
Plaintiff pro se, and
Research Associate Professor
352 Plad Blvd
Holtsville, New York 11742
(631) 447-2168
TO: Lori L. Pack
Office of the Attorney General
300 Motor Parkway
Suite 205
Hauppauge, NY 11788
posted by Tibor Gasparik # 7:00 AM 
Archives
June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 February 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 June 2008 October 2008 December 2008 February 2009
