Plaintiff and former school principal Michelle Askin alleged in a discrimination lawsuit that she was “subjected to unfair and excessive scrutiny and reprimands during 2010 to 2011, including an investigation into allegations of misconduct” and then terminated. At the time, plaintiff was 54 and served as the principal of a school she had founded.
In Askin v. NYC Dept. of Education, the Appellate Division, First Department, recently affirmed the dismissal of her complaint.
It was undisputed that plaintiff established the first three elements of her age discrimination claims under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws, since (1) she was a member of a protected class, (2) qualified for her position, and (3) subjected to an adverse employment action.
The court held, however, that she did not meet the fourth element of her prima facie case, namely, that “she was either terminated or treated differently under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination.”
Specifically:
Although plaintiff asserts that defendants’ actions were motivated by age-related bias, she does not make any concrete factual allegation in support of that claim, other than that she was 54 years old and was treated adversely under the State law or less well under the City HRL. Plaintiff’s allegations in this respect amount to mere legal conclusions, and do not suffice to make out this element of her claim.
This case illustrates that it is insufficient, under the law, merely to establish membership in a protected class and adverse treatment. Rather, employment discrimination plaintiffs must come forward with “concrete factual allegations” of discriminatory motivation.
If you believe you have been treated unfairly because of your age (or any other protected characteristic), please feel free to contact New York City age discrimination lawyer Michael J. Pospis today for a free phone consultation and case evaluation.