Employment Discrimination

In a recent decision, Wittmer v. Phillips 66 Company, 18-20251 (5th Cir. Feb. 6, 2019), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition on discrimination “because of … sex” does not protect against discrimination based on transgender status. In light of other…

Read More Fifth Circuit: Title VII Does Not Protect Against Transgender Discrimination
Share This:

In Cubelo v. City of New York, 2019 NY Slip Op 00689 (App. Div. 1st Dept. Jan. 31, 2019), the court affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s discrimination and retaliation claims. Plaintiff – who was born in Spain – alleged that he was “passed over for several promotions in his employment as a civil engineer with…

Read More Court Affirms Dismissal of Engineer’s Discrimination and Retaliation Claims
Share This:

In Sims v Trustees of Columbia University, No. 156566/13, 8262, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 00672, 2019 WL 385366 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept., Jan. 31, 2019), the Appellate Division, First Department held that the lower court properly dismissed plaintiff’s discrimination and retaliation, but not plaintiff’s hostile work environment, claims. As to plaintiff’s hostile work environment claims, the court…

Read More “Bubbles” Chimp Hostile Work Environment Claim Resurrected From Summary Judgment Dismissal
Share This:

In Clark v. Allen & Overy LLP, 2019 NY Slip Op 30146(U) ,Index No. 453138/2017 (Sup. Ct. NY Cty. Jan. 16, 2019) – an employment discrimination case including allegations of retaliatory discharge and sexual harassment (among many others) – the court dismissed, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s “breach of attorney client privilege” claim. Plaintiff claimed that “while working with…

Read More Court: No Cause of Action for “Breach of Attorney Client Privilege”
Share This:

From Deutsch v. City of New York Dept. of Envtl. Protection, 2019 NY Slip Op 30063(U), Index 161139/2017 (NY Sup. Ct. NY Cty. Jan. 7, 2019): Furthermore, none of the complaint allegations suggest that plaintiff complained about something that his employer was doing that would fall into the category of creating and presenting a danger to the public health…

Read More Whistleblower (Labor Law 740) Claim Dismissed Against NYC DEP
Share This:

In Daeisadeghi v. Equinox Great Neck, Inc., 16-CV-01698, 2019 WL 331637 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 25, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed on summary judgment plaintiff’s national origin-based hostile work environment claim. This case teaches, among other things, that even “insulting” conduct does not necessarily result in the establishment of a hostile work environment claim. From the decision:…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Claim Dismissed Against Equinox
Share This:

From DeFreitas v. Bronx Lebanon Hosp. Ctr., 2019 NY Slip Op 00375 (App. Div. 1st Dept. Jan. 22, 2019): In opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint alleging age discrimination in employment, plaintiffs met their burden under the New York State Human Rights Law (Executive Law § 296[1][a]) of showing that a material issue…

Read More Age Discrimination Case Proceeds Against Bronx Lebanon Hospital
Share This:

From Schneider v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 2019 WL 294309 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 23, 2019): [T]he Court will examine whether Defendants’ stated reason for Plaintiff’s termination, his accumulation of four written coachings in a twelve-month period, is mere pretext for discrimination. Pretext may be demonstrated by additional evidence that the employer’s proffered reason is not credible or…

Read More Written “Coachings” Were Not Pretext For Discrimination; Disability Discrimination Claim Dismissed on Summary Judgment
Share This:

From Plotzker v. Kips Bay Anesthesia, P.C., 745 Fed.Appx. 436, 437–38 (C.A.2 (N.Y.), 2018) (Summary Order): After reviewing the record de novo, we agree with the District Court that there is no genuine dispute of material fact with respect to at least one element of Plotzker’s retaliation claim, namely, that his employer was aware of his…

Read More Dismissal of Retaliation Claim Affirmed; Employer Unaware of Protected Activity
Share This: