Age Discrimination

by

In Bennett v. Time Warner Cable, the Supreme Court, New York County, held that plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded age discrimination claims under both a “disparate treatment” and “disparate impact” theory. Here are the alleged facts, as summarized by the court: Plaintiffs, whose ages range between 51 and 69, are employees of TWC, and until about September…

Read More Plaintiffs Sufficiently Allege “Disparate Treatment” and “Disparate Impact” Age Discrimination Claims Against Time Warner Cable
Share This:
by

In Hu v. UGL Services Unicco Operations Co., decided October 9, 2014, the Southern District of New York dismissed plaintiff’s age discrimination claims under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). One take-away point from this case…

Read More Absence of Ageist Comments Dooms Age Discrimination Case at the “Pretext” Stage
Share This:
by

In Delaney v. Bank of America et al. (decided 9/5/14), the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision granting defendant summary judgment on plaintiff’s age discrimination and breach of contract claims. Age Discrimination As to plaintiff’s age discrimination claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), the court rejected plaintiff’s reliance on another…

Read More Second Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Age Discrimination and Breach of Contract Claims
Share This:
by

In Vormittag v Unity Elec. Co., Inc., 12 CV 4116 RJD RLM, 2014 WL 4273303 [EDNY Aug. 28, 2014], the Eastern District of New York granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s age discrimination claim, but denied it with respect to plaintiff’s retaliation claim. Plaintiff sued after being furloughed and fired due to a large-scale…

Read More Father’s Third-Party Retaliation Claim Arising From Daughter’s Sex Discrimination Charge Survives Summary Judgment
Share This:
by

A recent Southern District of New York decision, Fitzgerald v Signature Flight Support Corp., 13 CV 4026 VB, 2014 WL 3887217 [SDNY Aug. 5, 2014], is illustrative of how a plaintiff may plausibly allege age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. There was no dispute that plaintiff satisfied the first three elements…

Read More Selective Enforcement of “Sleeping on the Job” Rules Plausibly Supports Age Discrimination Claim
Share This:
by

In Bhanusali v. Orange Regional Medical Center, the Second Circuit (in a Summary Order issued July 16, 2014) vacated the district court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s age, national origin, and race discrimination claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff, an Asian Indian-American orthopedic surgeon, alleged in his complaint…

Read More Surgeon Plausibly Alleged Discrimination Claims Based on “Sham Peer Review”
Share This:
by

A recent Eastern District decision, Sandvik v. Sears Holding/Sears Home Improvement Products, Inc., illustrates the nature and quantity of evidence necessary to overcome summary judgment in an age discrimination case under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act and its state/city law counterparts. Plaintiff – who worked for defendant for 38 years before his departure…

Read More Ageist Comments Support Discrimination Claim Against Sears
Share This:
by

Below is the complaint filed on May 12, 2014 in the Southern District of New York by television writer/producer and professor Mollie Fermaglich against New York University and others. The lawsuit is captioned Mollie Fermaglich v. New York University et al., 1:14-cv-03434, and has been assigned to Judge Engelmayer. Ms. Fermaglich, who is Jewish, asserts (among other things)…

Read More NYU Professor and TV Writer/Producer Mollie Fermaglich’s Federal Discrimination Suit Against NYU
Share This:
by

Kosarin-Ritter v. Mrs. John L. Strong, LLC, decided by the First Department on May 22, 2014, illustrates the often difficult burden encountered by a discrimination plaintiff. In affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for defendants, the court stated: Defendants established that there is no evidentiary route that could allow a jury to believe…

Read More Alleged Ageist Remarks Insufficient to Support Discrimination Claim
Share This: