Employment Discrimination Claims Reinstated Against Father Reilly et al

In Boliak v. Reilly, 2018 NY Slip Op 03745 (App. Div. 1st Dept. May 24, 2018), the court overturned the dismissal^[1]Boliak v. Reilly, 2017 NY Slip Op 32010, Index No. 153941/2016, Judge Erika Edwards, Sept. 22, 2017. of plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims under the NYC Human Rights Law against Father Michael P. Reilly and others.

From the decision:

The allegations that plaintiffs were subjected by defendant Father Reilly to a barrage of vulgar, misogynous and ageist remarks and epithets, which defendants Robert Richard and Greg Manos echoed, condoned, and amplified, state causes of action under the New York City Human Rights Law (Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-107) for gender and age discrimination through a hostile work environment (see Hernandez v Kaisman, 103 AD3d 106, 114-115 [1st Dept 2012], citing Williams v New York City Hous. Auth., 61 AD3d 62, 80 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 702 [2009]). The allegations also state causes of action for retaliation (see Fletcher v Dakota, Inc., 99 AD3d 43, 51-52 [1st Dept 2012]).

With the exception of Dr. Strange, the defendants named in the proposed complaint are subject to potential liability for Reilly’s alleged discriminatory conduct either vicariously or as aiders and abettors (see Administrative Code § 8-107[13][a]-[b]; Priore v New York Yankees, 307 AD2d 67, 74 [1st Dept 2003], lv denied 1 NY3d 504 [2003]; see also Malena v Victoria’s Secret Direct, LLC, 886 F Supp 2d 349, 367 [SD NY 2012]). Dr. Strange is alleged to be the board’s “current” chairman; since he is not alleged to have been a member of the board at any relevant time, the proposed complaint is palpably insufficient as to him.

The proposed complaint states a cause of action against Reilly and Manos for defamation of plaintiff Lawrence Boliak.

The court also held that “[p]laintiffs were not required to submit an affidavit of merit or make any other evidentiary showing in support of their motion” to amend their complaint.