From Matter of Leka v. New York City Law Dept., 2018 NY Slip Op 02549 (App. Div. 1st Dept. April 12, 2018): A probationary employee may be terminated without a hearing, for any reason or no reason at all, as long as the dismissal is not unlawful or in bad faith (see Matter of Che Lin Tsao…
Read More Probationary Employee Properly Terminated, Court HoldsIn Salas v. New York City Department of Investigation, 2018 WL 1614339, 16-cv-8573 (S.D.N.Y. March 30, 2018), the court (inter alia) held that plaintiff failed to state a religious discrimination (hostile work environment) claim. From the decision: Salas has failed to allege even a single instance where she or a coworker was personally harassed on the…
Read More Religious Discrimination (Hostile Work Environment) Claim Not StatedIn Salas v. New York City Department of Investigation, 2018 WL 1614339, 16-cv-8573 (S.D.N.Y. March 30, 2018), the court (inter alia) denied defendant’s motion to dismiss, and held that plaintiff – who suffered from a stutter – stated a claim for a hostile work environment under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). From the decision:…
Read More Plaintiff, Mocked For Stuttering, States Hostile Work Environment Claim Under the Americans with Disabilities ActOn April 11, 2018, the NYC Council enacted several laws (collectively the “Stop Sexual Harassment in NYC Act”) strengthening New York City’s anti-sexual harassment policies and combating sexual harassment in the workplace. This legislation will be among the strictest anti-sexual harassment legislation in the country. Information about the various laws can be found here (you can…
Read More NYC Council Enacts Sexual Harassment Legislative PackageIn Mayer v. Time, Inc., 17-cv-5613, 2018 WL 1738322 (S.D.N.Y. April 9, 2018) (J. Cote), the court dismissed plaintiff’s sex and age discrimination case on the ground of forum non conveniens. The court explained the legal principles applicable to the doctrine, including by noting the three factors to be considered: (1) the degree of deference to be…
Read More Sex, Age Discrimination Claims Dismissed Under Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine; U.K. Was More Appropriate ForumIn Milan v. Sprint Corporation, 2018 WL 1665690 (E.D.N.Y. April 6, 2018), a sexual harassment case, the court affirmed a Magistrate Judge’s Order granting plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery. Plaintiff sought, inter alia, “complaints of sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and/or retaliation against Sprint, including but not limited to complaints through the ‘Sprint’s Ethics Hotline’ and…
Read More Court Compels Discovery of Sexual Harassment Complaints in Lawsuit Against SprintIn Urena v. GVC Ltd., 2018 NY Slip Op 02426 (App. Div. 1st Dept. April 10, 2018) – a rear-end car accident case – the court affirmed the lower court’s decision to grant plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment judgment on the issue of liability and dismissal of all affirmative defenses and counterclaims alleging comparative fault. The First…
Read More Plaintiff Properly Awarded Summary Judgment in Hit-in-Rear CaseIn New York City Transit Authority v. Phillips, 2018 NY Slip Op 02442, 2018 WL 1719789 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dept. April 10, 2018), the court reversed a lower court decision and held that the arbitrator should have found that a Transit Authority employee (Aiken) subjected another (Melendez) to inappropriate and unwelcome comments of a sexual…
Read More Arbitrator Should Have Found That Transit Authority Employee Engaged in Sexual Harassment, First Department HoldsIn Bell v. Baruch College—CUNY, 16-cv-8378, 2018 WL 1274782 (S.D.N.Y. March 9, 2018), the court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the NYC Human Rights Law, but denied its motion to dismiss plaintiff’s Title VII retaliation claim. In sum, plaintiff – a…
Read More Retaliation Claim, But Not Female-on-Male Sexual Harassment (Hostile Work Environment) Claim, Survives DismissalIn Blair v. Brooklyn Transportation Corp., 17-cv-383, 2018 WL 1581974 (E.D.N.Y. March 30, 2018), the court (inter alia) denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s gender discrimination claim. From the decision: Plaintiff’s allegations are sufficient for the Court to infer that Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff. Defendant was aware of Plaintiff’s transgender status because, when Plaintiff began…
Read More Transgender Discrimination Case Continues Against Brooklyn Transportation Corp.