In Reilly v. First Niagara Bank, N.A., 2019 NY Slip Op 04974 (App. Div. 2nd Dept. June 19, 2019), the court affirmed the dismissal – for failure to state a claim under CPLR 3211(a)(7) – of plaintiff’s sex-based discrimination and hostile work environment claims under the New York State Human Rights Law, Executive Law §…
Read More Sex Discrimination, Hostile Work Environment Dismissal AffirmedIn Olivier v. County of Rockland et al, No. 15-CV-8337 (KMK), 2019 WL 2502349 (SDNY June 17, 2019), the court held that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to overcome defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The court explained the legal standard applicable to the third (“pretext”) step of the three-step burden-shifting framework applicable to Title VII retaliation…
Read More Retaliation Claim Survives Summary Judgment; Court Cites (e.g.) Weaknesses and Inconsistencies in Defendants’ Proffered Non-Retaliatory ReasonsIn Kubersky v. Cameron Indus., Inc., 2019 NY Slip Op 04882 (App. Div. 1st Dept. June 18, 2019), a retaliation case brought under New York Labor Law 215, the court affirmed the denial of defendants’ summary judgment motion on the ground that plaintiff did not provide timely notice to the Attorney General of her action.…
Read More Wage Retaliation Statute’s Attorney General Notice Provision Was Not a Condition Precedent to Suit, First Department HoldsA recent decision, Rodriguez v. Gikher, 2019 WL 2433596, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. June 11, 2019), provides an outline of the elements of a disability discrimination claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), as well as what must be alleged to properly plead such a claim. The court explains: The ADA prohibits discrimination against a…
Read More “Barebones” ADA Disability Discrimination ComplaintIn Desouza v. Office of Children and Family Services, 2019 WL 2477796 (E.D.N.Y. June 12, 2019), the court clarified differences between/among the various theories available to a plaintiff in a gender discrimination/sexual harassment case. It explained (paragraphing altered): Though claims challenging disparate treatment, quid pro quo sexual harassment, and hostile work environment are all claims of…
Read More Court Clarifies Difference Between “Hostile Work Environment” and “Disparate Treatment” Gender Discrimination Claims; Absence of “Adverse Employment Action” Results in DismissalThe noose is one of the most stark symbols of racism, conjuring up the ugly specter of one of the darkest (and, apparently, continuing) chapters of American history. In a recently-filed lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, captioned Curtis Anthony v. The Boeing Company, 2:19-cv-01656-DCN-BM, the plaintiff alleges, among…
Read More Race Discrimination Lawsuit Against Boeing Includes Allegation Involving NooseIn Vuono v. Consolidated Edison of New York, Inc., 2019 WL 2433654 (S.D.N.Y. 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s disability discrimination claim, finding that allegedly “excessive” drug and alcohol tests did not qualify as adverse employment actions. From the decision: Requiring an employee to be tested pursuant to the On Call program does not…
Read More Drug Testing Was Not an “Adverse Employment Action”, Court HoldsFrom MARIOS PANAYIOTOU, Plaintiff, v. N.Y.C. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Defendant., 2019 WL 2453438, at *5 (E.D.N.Y., 2019): As to the alleged national origin- and age-based animus, the incidents as described are not severe or pervasive enough to support a hostile work environment claim. Again, the plaintiff cites the principal’s instruction to “speak clearly” – an…
Read More National Origin- and Age-Based Hostile Work Environment Claims DismissedIn Alexander v. Program Development Services, Inc., 18-cv-1433, 2019 WL 2436436 (EDNY June 10, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s hostile work environment sexual harassment claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. From the decision (paragraphing altered): Plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim based on Fiddler’s sexually explicit and profane conduct…
Read More “Vulgar” Conduct Not “Bad Enough” to Make Out Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment ClaimIn Reitman v Ronell, No. 157658/2018, 2019 WL 2413149, at *1–2 (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County June 04, 2019) – in which plaintiff alleges, inter alia, claims for gender discrimination, quid pro quo sexual harassment, and hostile educational environment – the court considered and ruled on plaintiff’s motion for a protective order under CPLR…
Read More Court Discusses Use of Interrogatories in Sexual Harassment Case