In Schoenadel v. YouGov America Inc., 22-cv-10236 (AS), 2025 WL 371089 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 3, 2025), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s gender-based discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law.
After finding that plaintiff raised an issue of fact as to whether she was constructively discharged, the court turned to the issue of pretext:
To satisfy the third-stage burden under McDonnell Douglas and survive summary judgment in a Title VII disparate treatment case, a plaintiff may, but need not, show that the employer’s stated reason was false, and merely a pretext for discrimination; a plaintiff may also satisfy this burden by producing other evidence indicating that the employer’s adverse action was motivated at least in part by the plaintiff’s membership in a protected class.” Bart, 96 F.4th at 576.
YouGov argues that to the extent it took any adverse action against Schoenadel, it was due to poor performance. In response, Schoenadel points to “several types of evidence” from which a jury could infer that YouGov’s actions were motivated at least in part by discrimination. Dkt. 97 at 15–21. For example, McIntosh, Chahal, and Sarac (at least two of whom were key members of YouGov’s leadership team) privately referred to Schoenadel as “Mama Fratelli,” a villain from the film The Goonies. Dkt. 125 ¶ 461; Dkt. 75-31 at 175–77.
YouGov says that Schoenadel fails to describe how the nickname supports a discrimination claim. But Schoenadel points to deposition testimony in which McIntosh admitted that the name was based on her appearance, Dkt. 75-31 at 176, and she explains that the movie character “does not conform to conventional notions of femininity or attractiveness.” Dkt. 97 at 17. A jury could find that using it to refer to Schoenadel, a gay woman in a male-dominated field, reflects gender bias.5 Indeed, this conclusion is consistent with the Second Circuit’s decision in King v. Aramark Services, Inc., 96 F.4th 546 (2d Cir. 2024), where the court explained that singling out a woman for weight-related remarks and conduct can reflect gender bias, not just a bias against individuals with certain body types. Id. at 564. As the Supreme Court has explained, “we are beyond the day when an employer could evaluate employees by assuming or insisting that they match[ ] the stereotype associated with their group.”
Schoenadel also points to a “pattern of discrimination” that has led to multiple women in high-level positions leaving the company. Dkt. 97 at 18. YouGov responds that most of those women left voluntarily, and “[f]ive women resigning for new opportunities … is hardly sufficient evidence to establish a ‘pattern of discrimination.’ ” Dkt. 137 at 12. But YouGov glosses over evidence that women at YouGov expressed concerns about the company passing them over for promotions and holding them to higher standards than their male counterparts. See, e.g., Dkt. 104 ¶ 19 (Sara Eddleston left YouGov because she felt her efforts weren’t recognized and saw no room for advancement); Dkt. 93 ¶ 35 (Jillian Rowen complained to YouGov that she was denied a promotion for opposing sexist conduct). It also insists that a “non-party’s opinions … cannot preclude summary judgment in favor of YouGov,” Dkt. 125 ¶ 516, but this is wishful thinking. See Zakre v. Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale, 396 F. Supp. 2d 483, 508 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (denying summary judgment in part because other women’s testimony about employer’s “exclusionary culture” could “evidence[ ] a biased attitude toward women”).
[Citations omitted.]
The court further rejected defendant’s reliance on the “same actor inference”, noting that it “doubts whether this inference makes sense, either in the Title VII context or outside of it. An individual might hire and promote someone from a protected class, but nevertheless subject them to discrimination along the way—from petty slights and private jokes to more serious forms of differential treatment.”