staten-island-courtroom A courtroom in the Staten Island courthouse.

A federal court has dismissed all but one claim in a discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against Staten Island Judge Judith McMahon: that she transferred a court clerk in retaliation for reporting her alleged misconduct by making secret recordings.

U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York on Aug. 23 dismissed the bulk of a lawsuit filed by plaintiff Michael J. Pulizotto, who claimed that he faced anti-gay harassment and retaliation from McMahon and others in the court system.

In his lawsuit, Pulizotto alleged that McMahon, formerly the administrative judge for civil matters on Staten Island and the wife of Staten Island District Attorney Michael McMahon, and courthouse employees retaliated against Pulizotto and harassed him because he turned over evidence of corruption, in the form of secret recordings he made, to the inspector general and to federal prosecutors at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.

McMahon was administrative judge for both criminal and civil matters until 2015, when Michael McMahon announced that he was running for district attorney. At that point, Judith McMahon's role was altered to give her administrative duties over civil matters only, which was intended to avoid the appearance of any conflicts of interest.

But Pulizotto alleged that after Michael McMahon was elected district attorney, Judith McMahon intervened in courthouse business that pertained to criminal matters—at times on her husband's behalf.

The suit alleged that Pulizotto, once chief clerk, was transferred to a different office, and given fewer responsibilities, after word of his recordings got out.

A ruling on a defense motion to dismiss came Aug. 23. While Castel held that the majority of Pulizotto's claims could not pass legal muster, the sole remaining claim had potential since it was alleged that Pulizotto's transfer to a different office happened in close proximity to his reporting of the alleged corruption.

"As the complaint does not allege when McMahon knew of disclosures to the United States Attorney's office, the court cannot determine if the disclosure is close in time to Pulizotto's transfer on September 7, 2017," Castel wrote in the his opinion.

"Nevertheless, because the job transfer claim alleges disclosures to both the United States Attorney's Office and IG, and McMahon does not challenge that her knowledge of Pulizotto's reports to the IG are close in time to his transfer … the job transfer claim, will not be dismissed," Castel added.

Ben B. Rubinowitz, managing partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Rubinowitz, Bloom, Hershenhorn, Steigman & Mackauf in New York City, represents McMahon, and said McMahon was grateful for the decision.

"It is unfortunate that a clerk of the court would surreptitiously and illegally audio tape a judge in her chambers for an extended period of time and use his own improper conduct as a springboard for making false allegations and bringing a meritless action," Rubinowitz said in an email. "His conduct is violative of the law and his ethical obligations as an attorney.  Conversely, Judge McMahon did nothing improper and remains one of the finest judges on the bench.  She is extremely pleased that Judge Castel recognized that the vast majority of the allegations set forth against her had no merit as a matter of law in this very early stage of the litigation and to the extent Pulizotto wishes to continue this frivolous claim against her, she looks forward to the complete dismissal of these baseless claims in all respects."

Alan Serrins of Serrins & Associates in New York City represents Pulizotto and also did not respond to a request for comment Monday.