Pregnancy Discrimination

by

In Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 135 S.Ct. 1338 (March 25, 2015), the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted and applied a portion of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act relating to accommodations that covered employers must make to pregnant workers. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(k), amends Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of…

Read More U.S. Supreme Court Interprets Title VII’s Pregnancy Discrimination Act; Vacates Judgment Against Pregnant Employee
Share This:
by

In a complaint filed in New York State Supreme Court, captioned Cynthia Terrana v. Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. et al. (NY Sup. Ct. 3/6/15, No. 152281-2015), plaintiff alleges that she was subjected to discrimination (termination) based on her pregnancy, in violation of the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. In particular, plaintiff alleges (among…

Read More Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Against Cantor Fitzgerald
Share This:
by

In a lawsuit captioned Laknidhi v. AbilTo, Inc. and Michael Laskoff, NY Sup. Ct. Index No. 151506/2015 (filed 2/13/15), plaintiff alleges that defendants AbilTo and Laskoff (AbilTo’s CEO) subjected her to “harassment and discrimination … because of her pregnancy (and associated need for pregnancy leave and post-pregnancy accommodations) … which culminated in” her unlawful termination.…

Read More Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Against AbilTo Inc. and Michael Laskoff
Share This:
by

Here is the complaint, filed in the Southern District of New York on Jan. 30, 2015 and assigned index number 15-cv-00688, alleging various claims – namely, pregnancy discrimination, gender discrimination, sexual harassment, national origin discrimination, race discrimination, and retaliation – against Mergermarket.    

Read More Lawsuit: Sexual Harassment (etc.) at “Boys Club” Mergermarket
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 Peralta v. Roros 940, Inc., 72 F. Supp. 3d 385 (E.D.N.Y. 2014), the Eastern District of New York denied defendants’ summary judgment motion as to plaintiff’s discriminatory termination (based on pregnancy) claim, but granted it as to her pregnancy-based hostile work environment claim. The defendant, a FedEx subcontractor, alleged that plaintiff, a delivery driver, was…

Read More Unequal Treatment of Non-Pregnant Co-Workers Supports Pregnancy Discrimination Claim Against FedEx Subcontractor
Share This:
by

Here is the complaint recently filed by Mets executive Leigh Castergine against Sterling Mets Front Office LLC and Chief Operating Officer Jeffrey Wilpon. Plaintiff alleges that she was discriminated against by Wilpon because she had a child without being married (a practice Wilpon was “morally opposed to”), and then fired for complaining about discrimination.

Read More Mets Executive Alleges She Was Fired For Out-of-Wedlock Pregnancy
Share This:
by

In Codrington v. Carco Group (decided June 27, 2014), the Eastern District of New York held that plaintiff stated a plausible pregnancy discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In sum, plaintiff claims that defendant replaced her with a younger non-mother six weeks after she gave birth and while she was on…

Read More Plaintiff Plausibly Alleges Pregnancy Discrimination Where She Was Replaced by Non-Pregnant Employee
Share This:
by

In Ji Sun Jennifer Kim v Goldberg, Weprin, Finkel, Goldstein, LLP (decided June 3, 2014), the Appellate Division, First Department held that the plaintiff’s claims of retaliatory termination under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws were not collaterally estopped by a prior federal court decision dismissing her claims under the Family and…

Read More Dismissal of FMLA Claims Does Not Preclude Assertion of State/City Human Rights Law Retaliation Claims, First Department Holds
Share This: