In Duckett-Holmes v. Planned Parenthood of Greater New York, Inc., No. 159488/2024, 2026 WL 93691 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Jan. 05, 2026), the court, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim.
This decision illustrates the basic principles governing the pleading of such a claim:
In order to state a claim for a hostile work environment, a plaintiff must allege “harassment sufficiently severe or pervasive as to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive working environment” (Forrest, 309 AD2 at 556; Agosto v N.Y. City Dep’t of Educ., 982 F3d 86, 101 [2nd Cir 2020] [a plaintiff must allege that “her workplace was so severely permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that the terms and conditions of her employment were thereby altered”] [internal quotation marks omitted]).
As with plaintiff’s discrimination claim, “the complaint fails to state [a] cause[] of action [for] hostile work environment” because the allegations are “conclusory and vague” (Polite v Marquis Marriot Hotel, 195 AD3d 965, 967 [2nd Dept 2021]). Plaintiff’s complaint asserts, without factual support, that “throughout Plaintiff’s employment, she was subjected to a continuing pattern and practice of discrimination and hostile work environment based upon her race, color, and gender” (NYSCEF Doc No 1 ¶ 26).
The court concluded that these allegations amount to “bare legal conclusions” which are insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.