ALBANY - A federal judge will allow a former employee at the state Office of Mental Health to proceed with a claim that she was raped by her supervisor at their office.
The ruling issued this week will allow the woman's rape claim - which is in addition to claims that include sexual harassment, retaliation and workplace discrimination - to go forward.
The employee is seeking at least $3 million in damages in the case filed last year against the agency, where her claim says she was fired after telling her supervisor she planned to speak with human resources about the alleged assault.
It started more than three years ago, when the employee started working at the state office in Albany. She's been allowed to remain anonymous in the case and is listed in the complaint as "Jane Doe."
She alleged that about a month after she started working for the state, Matthew Canuteson, her supervisor and the agency's chief diversity officer, began making sexual advances toward her, largely through graphic text messages.
But she said that she played into that behavior "in order to try to placate Canuteson and stay in his good graces in light of the control he exercised over her ongoing employment," according to the lawsuit she filed against him and the state last year.
That's how the relationship was for about another month, she said, until March 17, 2023. That's when she said Canuteson walked into her office, closed the door and, after a few minutes, locked it.
He allegedly approached her and, without saying anything, began to touch her body. She said she was "frozen with fear, anger and confusion" during the encounter and thought he "could and would physically overpower her" if she tried to escape.
But he then abruptly left her office without going any further, she said.
After that, she said she told him that evening that she did not want to have a sexual relationship with him. The texting continued, she said.
But in early May that year, she said she had a second encounter with Canuteson in which he closed and locked the door to her office again and began touching her. That's when, she said, he undid his pants and sexually assaulted her.
"Canuteson said nothing during the entirety of the assault," the lawsuit alleges.
"Again feeling paralyzed by fear and confusion, (she) was silent throughout the entirety of the time Canuteson was in her office and barely moved during the physical encounter," it said.
She did not immediately report either incident. But later that month, she said she stopped engaging with his sexual advances via text messages. That's when she said he "became increasingly confrontational" with her.
After about another month, in June, she said that she called to confront him about the allegedly hostile behavior. The next day, "he had decided to relieve her of her supervisory responsibilities," according to the lawsuit.
After that happened, she said that she texted him to tell him she was setting up a meeting with human resources to talk about that decision and his "sexual harassment and retaliatory behavior."
About an hour later, she said that she called him to talk about it again. She said she was then placed on speakerphone and was told by Canuteson that Dan Ragone from the agency's human resources department was on the call with them.
But she said she was surprised to be told by Ragone that Canuteson had informed him that she had quit her job that morning. She informed Ragone that she had not quit.
"In response, Ragone abruptly advised (her) that if she refused to resign, then OMH was terminating her employment," the lawsuit alleges.
After the call, she said she reached out to others in human resources and was told by them that she, indeed, had been fired over "one purportedly problematic email (she) sent to a subordinate" the month prior.
That email, which is not detailed in the lawsuit or other filings on the docket, had not been raised with her before that call, she said. She had not been subject to disciplinary action before then.
She filed the lawsuit against him and the agency in July 2025. Since then, there hasn't been a resolution in the case and one isn't expected for several months.
The state attorney general's office opposed her motion to remain anonymous, saying she could "certainly seek less drastic remedies than a complete cloak of anonymity," including redactions to documents that might be sensitive.
The state also argued that, because she didn't provide any medical documentation to support her claims, they shouldn't be treated as sufficient for her to proceed under a pseudonym.
"Because speculative claims of mental harm are insufficient, courts have suggested plaintiffs submit medical documentation in support of these contentions, which plaintiff has failed to do here," wrote Aimee Cowan, an assistant attorney general.
Cowan wrote that allowing her to remain anonymous could also harm the state's defense.
"Allowing (her) to proceed anonymously would disadvantage (the state) at all stages of litigation, including settlement, discovery, and trial because (her) anonymity would make it more difficult to obtain witnesses and witness testimony, (the state) would have less leverage in settlement negotiations, and (the state) would not be able to fully and adequately cross-examine the plaintiff," Cowan wrote.
But the state lost that fight. U.S. Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart of the Northern District of New York allowed the former employee to remain identified under the Jane Doe pseudonym.
As for Canuteson, he remained employed at the state Office of Mental Health for several months after she was fired. He resigned in December 2023, according to the agency's response to the lawsuit.
It's unclear if he was asked to resign. The former employee suggested in her lawsuit that he faced pressure to leave after what happened to her.
Neither the state nor Canuteson have filed a detailed response to the lawsuit or a motion to dismiss it in full. The decision handed down this week is the result of a motion from Canuteson to dismiss her claim of rape - one of six causes of action in the lawsuit.
But in that motion, attorneys for Canuteson don't explicitly allege that they didn't have sex. They argued, instead, that she hadn't shown that he had raped her.
"There are no allegations within the complaint that (Canuteson) exerted physical force against (her) on May 3, 2023," they wrote. "Likewise, plaintiff does not plead any facts to establish any history of physical and/or verbal abuse prior to this day to demonstrate the element of forcible compulsion."
U.S. District Judge Elizabeth C. Coombe wrote in her decision this week that the employee's description of feeling physically helpless during the alleged assault was enough for the claim to survive.
When deciding such a motion, Coombe wrote, judges have to consider the claims as favorable to the plaintiff.
"Viewing the factual allegations as true and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of Plaintiff, these allegations are sufficient to survive the motion to dismiss with respect to the allegation of physical helplessness," Coombe wrote.
The state Office of Mental Health said the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
There's more to Albany with the Times Union. Subscribe today for just 25¢.
This article originally published at Former state worker's rape claim can move forward, federal judge rules.