Pleading

by

The Southern District of New York recently held, in Khan v. Hilton Worldwide, Inc., No. 14 CIV. 1011 ALC, 2015 WL 738108 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 20, 2015), that a failure to rehire an employee qualifies as an “adverse employment action” and that plaintiff’s retaliation claims under Title VII and the NYC Human Rights Law survived defendants’…

Read More Court: “Failure to Rehire” is an “Adverse Employment Action”
Share This:
by

In Dunn v. URS Corp., 13-cv-6626 (SDNY Jan. 12, 2015), the Southern District of New York held that plaintiff, an African American man, sufficiently alleged race discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Plaintiff alleged that defendants failed to promote him, paid him less than what similarly situated employees received, failed…

Read More Raises Given to Others Supports Race Discrimination Claim
Share This:
by

In Rodriguez v. City of New York, decided January 23, 2015, the Eastern District of New York held that plaintiff, a NYPD officer, sufficiently alleged a claim for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Plaintiff alleges that the…

Read More NYPD Officer Characterized as “Delusional” Plausibly Alleges Disability Discrimination Claims
Share This:
by

In Carter v. Verizon, decided January 20, 2015, the Southern District of New York dismissed all of plaintiff’s gender and age discrimination claims, except for his gender discrimination / hostile work environment claim under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). After dismissing plaintiff’s federal and state law claims, the court proceeded to assess plaintiff’s…

Read More Male Employee (Barely) Survives Dismissal of Hostile Work Environment Claim Under the New York City Human Rights Law
Share This:
by

In the case of Vale v. Great Neck Water Pollution Control District, decided January 20, 2015, the Eastern District of New York held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged various claims – including discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation – under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Plaintiff alleged that she was subjected to unfair treatment in…

Read More Plaintiff Sufficiently Alleges Employment Discrimination Based on Disability (Broken Wrist)
Share This:
by

In Gorman v. Covidien Sales, LLC, decided December 31, 2014, the Southern District of New York discussed the affirmative defense based on the so-called “after-acquired evidence” doctrine/defense. In this employment discrimination case, plaintiff sought “damages for alleged discrimination on the basis of military status and medical disability, retaliation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress during his…

Read More Defendants May Amend Answer to Assert the “After-Acquired Evidence” Defense in Discrimination Case Where Plaintiff Recorded Phone Conversations With Supervisor
Share This:
by

In Denis v. Home Depot, U.S.A., the Eastern District of New York recently permitted plaintiff to amend his complaint to add a claim for punitive damages. Plaintiff alleged that he sustained personal injuries resulting from a false arrest at a Nanuet, NY Home Depot store for attempted shoplifting. Here are the pertinent facts, as summarized…

Read More Plaintiff May Amend Complaint to Add Claim for Punitive Damages in False Arrest Lawsuit Against Home Depot
Share This:
by

In Albin v. LVMH Moet Louis Vuitton, the Southern District of New York held that plaintiff plausibly alleged claims of pregnancy discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (of which the Pregnancy Discrimination Act is a part), the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights…

Read More Plaintiff Plausibly Alleges Pregnancy Discrimination Against Louis Vuitton
Share This:
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: