Spring may file $7.8M lawsuit
Ex-schenectady school superintendent says he was coerced to resign
Former Schenectady Superintendent of Schools Larry Spring has filed a notice of claim stating that he plans to pursue a $7.8 million legal action against the district.
The claim alleges Spring was “coerced” to resign a year ago based on what he insists were false sexual harassment and workplace retaliation allegations made by a female employee, and that the district subsequently breached a confidentiality agreement by allegedly sharing materials concerning the claims against Spring with the media.
Spring contends that his career and reputation have been ruined, he has suffered “significant emotional distress” and has been unable to find a new job.
The Times Union reported last May that an internal investigation prompted by a sexual
harassment complaint triggered Spring ’s departure from the $204,064-a-year post, which he had held since June 2012.
That district’s investigation noted that the complaint had been filed by a woman employed by Capital Region BOCES but worked within the city school system. The district’s outside counsel, the Rochester-based law firm Harris Beach, investigated the matter and delivered its findings to the school board in March. The report stated that during the course of the investigation into Spring ’s behavior, investigators anonymously received several photographs of Spring either partially or completely nude. Some of the photographs appeared to have been taken on school property, the report stated.
Spring ’s notice of claim, a precursor to a lawsuit, was filed last month and was provided to the Times Union by the district on Friday in response to a Freedom of Information Law request.
The notice states that on March 2, 2020, the woman gave the district information accusing Spring of sexual harassment and workplace retaliation, which he insists were false.
Once he learned of the allegations from district’s attorney, the claim states, Spring provided a detailed letter that he says demonstrated that the allegations were false and that “his cellular phone had been illegally hacked.”
The district’s lawyer refused to accept the letter or let school board members see it, according to the claim.
A meeting in which Spring planned to give his side of the story never happened, the filing asserts, because the school district’s attorney told Spring that officials “did not want to hear anything ” Spring had to say and that the meeting would “only be designed to create sympathy for him.”
The claim says the district told Spring that unless he resigned, he would be placed on unpaid leave, the allegations would be made public, and that a “suspension of any kind will ensure he does not work in education again,” the claim states, quoting the district’s lawyer.
“And, I am not seeing how that action takes place other than in public session,” the lawyer stated, according to the filing.
Spring ’s attorneys said in response that the district was required to interview him, and that what they were attempting to do was a violation of state education law and the terms of his contract.
The claim goes on to say that the attorney for the district replied that he “doesn’t care,” that the courts are closed because of the COVID -19 pandemic and that it would likely “be months before you find someone ... to hear your case.”
“When faced with the threat of termination, the possible disclosure of the scurrilous and false allegations to the media and the loss of income in a public setting without the opportunity to contest the allegations, claimant entered into a separation agreement with the district whereby claimant would resign employment with a confidentiality clause included in the agreement,” the document states. “This would allow the claimant to protect his reputation and secure new and additional employment as opposed to facing the loss of any possibility of working in education again as promised by the district’s counsel.”
On March 25, the day his resignation was announced, Spring and the school district reached a separation agreement that stipulated Spring would not take legal action against the district, and neither party would speak or write negative or disparaging comments about the other. The five-page agreement, which includes Spring ’s one-sentence resignation letter, also included a confidentiality clause.
Both sides remained silent on the reasons for Spring ’s exit, citing the agreement. The Times Union’s report appeared less than two months later. In it, Spring insisted he was innocent of the allegations against him.
“Legally, the district and I are bound by confidentiality and that is something I take very seriously,” Spring said in an email to the Times Union last May. “I believe in treating people with respect and am very proud of the work and dedication the entire team put forth at the Schenectady City School District over the past eight years. I wish them nothing but the best going forward.”
A school district spokesman and school board President John Foley declined to comment Friday, citing the pending litigation. Attorney Kevin Luibrand, who is representing Spring, also declined comment.