In Nolan Graber v. Cayuga Home For Children, 5:24-CV-468, 2024 WL 4870326 (N.D.N.Y. Nov. 22, 2024), the court, inter alia, held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged constructive discharge in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State Human Rights Law.
From the decision:
A constructive discharge occurs when the employer, rather than acting directly, deliberately makes an employee’s working conditions so intolerable that the employee is forced into an involuntary resignation. Working conditions are considered so intolerable when they are so difficult or unpleasant that a reasonable person in the employee’s shoes would have felt compelled to resign.
Defendants argue that plaintiff has failed to plausibly allege 1) that there is evidence of defendants’ intent to create an intolerable workplace that forced her to resign, and 2) that a reasonable employee, subjected to the same conditions Nolan Graber faced at Cayuga, would find them so intolerable that an employee would feel compelled to resign. Upon review, this argument will be rejected. The amended complaint plausibly alleges that, after Nolan Graber participated in the age-discrimination investigation, her relationship with CEO Hayes deteriorated and her role at Cayuga eroded. For instance, upon his return, CEO Hayes repeatedly criticized plaintiff’s handling of the investigation. CEO Hayes allegedly baselessly critiqued the performance of the HR and recruiting groups plaintiff supervised after he returned from leave. Likewise, the complaint alleges that CEO Hayes refused to speak to Nolan Graber or acknowledge her presence—behaviors that did not begin until after the investigation. Further, the pleading alleges that CEO Hayes stripped plaintiff of her job duties and reassigned the employees who directly reported to her. Lastly, the pleading alleges that while plaintiff was on FMLA leave, CEO Hayes hired another employee who held the same job functions, if not the same title, that she did prior to going on leave. In short, the pleading plausibly alleges that an objectively reasonable employee would have felt compelled to resign under these circumstances.
[Internal quotation marks and citations omitted.]
Based on this, the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s constructive discharge claim.