FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

New lawsuit alleges white female NYPD supervisor was targeted, isolated, disciplined, demoted, and formally charged after opposing discriminatory treatment and alleged crime-classification manipulation inside Transit District 32

NEW YORK, N.Y. — June 25, 2026 — Eric Sanders, Esq., of The Sanders Firm, P.C. announcing that Dina L. Sanfratello, a former NYPD Lieutenant who was demoted on April 27, 2026, has filed a lawsuit in New York County Supreme Court against The City of New York, Police Commissioner Jessica S. Tisch, Tamecca Greene, and James A. Dawes, alleging race discrimination, gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law.

The lawsuit alleges that Sanfratello, a white female NYPD employee, was treated less favorably than similarly situated male and/or non-white supervisors while assigned to Transit District 32. According to the complaint, she was denied stable schedules, favorable regular days off, tour flexibility, leave, overtime, Department vehicle usage, and normal command treatment that other supervisors received.

The case is not about one bad schedule, one denied day off, or one workplace disagreement.

It is about what the complaint describes as a sustained command-level course of discriminatory and retaliatory treatment that moved from unequal assignments to formal career destruction.

According to the lawsuit, Tamecca Greene, a Black female who was then the Commanding Officer of Transit District 32 and is now a Deputy Inspector assigned to Transit Bureau Special Operations District, was the principal actor. The complaint alleges that Greene controlled Sanfratello’s schedules, assignments, regular days off, leave requests, overtime access, vehicle usage, evaluations, discipline, and command treatment.

The complaint alleges that Greene repeatedly gave male and/or non-white supervisors more favorable treatment while imposing harsher, shifting, and pretextual standards on Sanfratello. Comparators identified in the complaint allegedly received steadier tours, favorable regular days off, discretionary leave, chart days, mutual-tour accommodations, overtime opportunities, Department vehicle access, and greater command tolerance under comparable circumstances.

Sanfratello alleges that the retaliation escalated after she objected to discriminatory targeting and refused to conform to command practices she reasonably believed involved the downgrading or manipulation of crime classifications and related reporting practices.

According to the complaint, Sanfratello first raised concerns after a November 5, 2024 incident involving injured police officers. She allegedly believed the incident required assault-related complaint reports, but later learned the classification had been changed to resisting arrest and that fewer complaint reports had been prepared than she believed were required. The complaint alleges that additional classification and reporting concerns arose in November and December 2024.

The lawsuit does not assert separate whistleblower claims. Instead, the alleged crime-classification facts are pleaded as evidence of protected opposition, retaliatory motive, hostile work environment, and pretext.

After Sanfratello objected, the complaint alleges, Greene’s treatment escalated. Sanfratello alleges she was removed from field responsibilities, subjected to repeated assignment changes, denied leave under shifting “coverage” rationales, restricted from overtime, restricted from Department vehicle usage, isolated from command communications, and targeted with special rules that were not imposed on comparable supervisors.

The lawsuit also names James A. Dawes, a Black male who served as Executive Officer of Transit District 32. According to the complaint, Dawes did not merely observe Greene’s conduct. He allegedly continued and formalized it.

The complaint alleges that Dawes participated in discipline, enforced restrictions, denied relief from retaliatory working conditions, denied Sanfratello’s request for relief before a June 8, 2025 Transit District 33 detail, and generated a negative evaluation that adopted Greene’s adverse narrative despite limited direct observation of Sanfratello and despite Sanfratello’s transfer away from Transit District 32 before the end of the relevant rating period.

That June 8, 2025 detail later became central to formal Charges and Specifications.

According to the complaint, Sanfratello was assigned to an excessive multi-tour schedule before that detail and advised Dawes that she would have inadequate sleep and needed relief concerning the assignment and permission to use a Department vehicle. Dawes allegedly denied the request.

The complaint alleges that Greene later used the June 8, 2025 detail as part of Sanfratello’s adverse interim evaluation, including allegations concerning field presence, activity logs, meal period, and interrupted patrol.

The lawsuit further alleges that on August 11, 2025, Sanfratello was directed to report to the NYPD Risk Management Bureau at 375 Pearl Street and was advised that her probationary period in the rank of Lieutenant was being extended based upon Greene’s self-initiated recommendation. Sanfratello allegedly had been scheduled to complete probation in the rank of Lieutenant on or about October 24, 2025. Instead, her probation was extended to on or about April 23, 2026.

According to the complaint, Sanfratello was modified on April 21, 2026. On April 27, 2026, Captain Ravi Singh and Lieutenant Mei Pan allegedly appeared at 518 Metropolitan at approximately 0900 hours, placed her on modified assignment, and took her firearms, shield, and identification card without providing a reason.

Later that same morning, Sanfratello was directed to 375 Pearl Street. At approximately 1115 hours, she was served with paperwork demoting her from the rank of Lieutenant. The complaint alleges that Lieutenant Brown advised her the demotion order came directly from the Police Commissioner’s Office, but no explanation was provided.

Police Commissioner Jessica S. Tisch is sued in her individual and official capacities. The complaint alleges that Sanfratello’s modification, demotion, rank status, disciplinary records, personnel records, employment restrictions, and continuing institutional consequences were implemented, approved, ratified, maintained, continued, or remain subject to correction through NYPD headquarters-level and Commissioner-level authority.

On or about May 20, 2026, after Sanfratello had already been modified and demoted, the NYPD preferred formal Charges and Specifications against her under CHIA 2026-1625 / IAB Log No. 2026-18017. Those charges arose from the June 8, 2025 Transit District 33 detail and alleged lateness, failure to submit a lost-time report, failure to scan in and out, and false Department record entries concerning an activity log and overtime request.

The complaint alleges that the Charges and Specifications continued the same retaliatory narrative Greene and Dawes had generated while Sanfratello was assigned to Transit District 32.

“This lawsuit alleges a familiar but deeply troubling pattern,” said Eric Sanders, Esq., of The Sanders Firm, P.C. “When a supervisor refuses to go along with questionable command practices and complains about unequal treatment, the machinery of the Department gets turned against her. The allegations here are not simply that Ms. Sanfratello was treated unfairly. The allegation is that command discretion was converted into a weapon: schedules, days off, overtime, evaluations, probation, demotion, and charges.”

The lawsuit seeks reinstatement to the rank of Lieutenant, full back pay, lost overtime, lost benefits, restoration of seniority, time-in-rank, pension credit, leave accruals, promotional eligibility, correction and removal of discriminatory and retaliatory personnel and disciplinary records, rescission or correction of the Charges and Specifications, compensatory damages, emotional-distress damages, punitive damages against the individual defendants to the extent permitted by law, attorneys’ fees, costs, interest, and other appropriate legal and equitable relief.

The defendants are presumed to deny the allegations. The claims in the complaint are allegations only unless and until proven in court.

About The Sanders Firm, P.C.

The Sanders Firm, P.C. is a New York-based law firm focused on civil rights, immigration, employment discrimination, police misconduct, and other high-stakes matters. Its founder and president, Eric Sanders, Esq., is a retired NYPD officer who brings a rare inside perspective to the intersection of government power, public institutions, enforcement discretion, and constitutional accountability.

For more than twenty years, Sanders has counseled thousands of clients and handled complex matters involving police use of force, sexual harassment, retaliation, systemic discrimination, immigration consequences, and related civil-rights violations. He is widely recognized as a leading New York civil-rights attorney and a prominent voice on evidence-based policing, institutional accountability, equal justice, and rights-based immigration advocacy.

Media Contact