MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Wendy Fletcher and James Hughes bring this civil rights action against Defendants Village of Lake Placid and its employees Craig Randall, Art Devlin, Peter Holderied, Jason Leon, Janet Bliss, Anita Estling, and Brad Hathaway (the “Village Defendants”); Northwood School of Lake Placid and its employees Michael Maher and Thomas Broderick (the “Northwood Defendants”); James Brooks (“Defendant Brooks”); Bette & Cring Construction Group, LLC and its employees Matthew Bette, Dick White, Patrick Gebbie, and John Doe (the “Bette & Cring Defendants”); O’Neil Contracting, Bloomingdale, New York and its employee John O’Neil (the “O’Neil Defendants”); and Burke Excavation Demolition, Inc. and its employees Shawn Burke and Jodi Burke (the “Burke Defendants”). (Dkt. No. 60) (“Amended Complaint”). The above employee defendants are sued in their official and individual capacities. (Id.). Now before the Court are the following motions from Defendants: 1) the Village Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 65); 2) the Northwood Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 74); 3) Defendant Brooks’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 76); 4) the Burke Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 80); 5) the Bette & Cring Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 82); and 6) the O’Neil Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Dkt. No. 105). Plaintiffs oppose these motions. (Dkt. Nos. 73, 88, 90, 93-94, 106). Plaintiff also moves to strike certain materials cited by the Village Defendants. (Dkt. No. 73). Most of the moving Defendants have also filed reply papers.1 (Dkt. Nos. 78, 96, 98, 102-03). II. FACTS2 Plaintiffs’ claims arise from the renovation and construction of the Northwood School building on Main Street in the Village of Lake Placid (the “Northwood Project”). (Dkt. No. 60). Plaintiffs are residents of the Village, and their home and property at 18 Grace Way in Lake Placid is adjacent to the Northwood School building. (Id.,
10-11, 47-49). Plaintiffs’ home is located on a property referred to as the “Fletcher Lot.” (Id., 49). Plaintiff Fletcher alleges that she is disabled due to multiple sclerosis and that “at times she needs to rely on a cane and a wheelchair for mobility.” (Id.,
