Employment Discrimination

by

In Zutrau v. Ice Systems, Inc., the Supreme Court, Suffolk County dismissed plaintiff’s “quid pro quo” sexual harassment claim. Plaintiff – the entity defendant’s executive vice president – asserted numerous claims, both individually and derivatively, against the entity defendant and Jansing, its president and majority shareholder. The court explained the law as follows: To make out…

Read More Court Rejects “Quid Pro Quo” Sexual Harassment Claim Where Plaintiff was Fired After Rebuffing Ex-Lover’s Attempt to Rekindle Relationship
Share This:
by

Below is the federal court complaint filed by Rita Walsh against the New York City Housing Authority on September 12, 2011 containing her allegations that she was not hired by the NYCHA as its first female bricklayer because of her gender. Her complaint – which seeks relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York…

Read More Plaintiff Alleges She Was Not Hired For Bricklayer Position Because of Her Gender
Share This:
by

In Briggs v. Women in Need, Inc, 819 F.Supp.2d 119 (2011), the court denied defendant’s FRCP 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint alleging discrimination under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) by her nonprofit employer. The Facts Plaintiff advised her employer of her pregnancy in March 2007, went on medical leave due to her high-risk pregnancy…

Read More Plaintiff May Press Pregnancy Discrimination Claims Against Non-Profit Women in Need Inc.
Share This:
by

Although this is not a New York case, the issues raised are of sufficient import to plaintiff-side employment litigators everywhere, particularly since it resulted in a summary judgment for plaintiff. EEOC commentary here; text of opinion (EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., 09-CV-602-GKF-FHM (N.D. Okla. July 13, 2011)) here.

Read More Oklahoma federal court agrees with EEOC’s claims against store for failure to hire hijab-wearing Muslim girl
Share This:
by

In Govori v. Goat Fifty LLC, 10 Civ. 8982 (S.D.N.Y. March 30, 2011), the Southern District of New York held that plaintiff adequately stated a claim for pregnancy discrimination. Plaintiff contended that she was fired after announcing her plans to undergo in vitro fertilization (“IVF”), and sought relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights…

Read More Female Server States Claim For Pregnancy Discrimination, Bias Against In Vitro Fertilization
Share This:
by

In Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 131 S.Ct. 1186 (2011), (slip opinion here), the Supreme Court clarified the circumstances – under the Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), 38 U.S.C. 4311 – under which an employer may be held liable for employment discrimination based on the discriminatory animus of an employee who influenced, but did not…

Read More U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies “Cat’s Paw” Liability Theory
Share This:
by

On January 24, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court (in an opinion authored by Justice Scalia) unanimously held that an employee (Eric Thompson), who was fired after his fiancee Miriam Regalado filed an EEOC charge alleging sex discrimination, could assert a claim for retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.…

Read More Supreme Court Permits Fired Fiance to Maintain Title VII Retaliation Suit
Share This: