Here is the recently-filed lawsuit, captioned Springs v. City of New York et al (SDNY 17-cv-00451), in which a black firefighter alleges that he endured sexual hazing and race discrimination. Among other things, plaintiff alleges that one defendant told him “I don’t like you … blacks getting on the job this way. You don’t have good…
Read More Lawsuit Alleges Sexual Hazing and Race Discrimination at NY Fire Dept.In Zhao-Royo v. New York State Educ. Dept., 14-CV-0935, 2017 WL 149981 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 13, 2017), the court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims. As to her disparate treatment claim, it concluded that plaintiff “failed to identify circumstances justifying an inference that [alleged] incidents were actually related to Plaintiff’s…
Read More Court Dismisses Disparate Treatment Employment Discrimination Claim; Finds Comparator Evidence Insufficient and No Connection Between Brusque/Rude/Unfriendly Conduct and Protected StatusToday is Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a federal holiday that marks the birthday of the civil rights leader, who was assassinated on April 4, 1968. Dr. King was present when President Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a federal law that prohibits discrimination in (e.g.) employment (Title VII) and public…
Read More Celebrating Martin Luther King Jr.In Green v. Avis Budget Grp., Inc., No. 11-CV-00269V(F), 2017 WL 35452 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2017), the court dismissed plaintiff’s employment discrimination (disparate treatment), hostile work environment, and retaliation claims. Here I’ll discuss the court’s evaluation of the “adverse employment action” element of the prima facie case[1]“To establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination…
Read More Criticism of Work, Failure to Provide Desired Schedule (Etc.) Were Not “Adverse Employment Actions”As 2016 draws to a close, I’d like to take a brief moment to reflect on the past year. Cases We have continued to fight on behalf of our clients in employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and personal injury matters. Cases we have handled this year include: Sexual harassment ($500,000 settlement) Disability discrimination and retaliation ($30,000…
Read More Pospis Law Year in Review: 2016In Nadesan v. Citizens Fin. Grp., No. 16-942-CV, 2016 WL 7177496 (2d Cir. Dec. 8, 2016) (Summary Order; Judges Livingston, Chin, Carney), the court clarified the scope of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, a federal statute that prohibits certain forms of discrimination. Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 provides, in pertinent part: All persons…
Read More 2d Circuit Clarifies Scope of Race Discrimination Statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1981In order to hold an employer liable for a hostile work environment, a plaintiff needs to establish two elements: The existence of a hostile work environment (i.e., sufficiently “hostile” conduct connected a protected characteristic); and A specific basis for imputing the hostile work environment to the employer (vicarious liability). A recent case, Ward v. Shaddock, No.…
Read More Hostile Work Environment Created by Co-Worker Not Imputable to Entity EmployerFrom Matter of Khan v. N.Y. City Health & Hosps. Corp., 144 A.D.3d 600 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dept. Nov. 29, 2016): The termination of petitioner’s appointment as Director of Pharmacy did not violate a constitutional or statutory provision or a policy established by decisional law (see Matter of Bergamini v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface…
Read More Pharmacy Director’s Race, Religion, National Origin Discrimination Claims Properly Dismissed; Article 78 Proceeding UnsuccessfulWe’ve seen one judge warn a lawyer not to call their adversary an “asshole” in private correspondence. Now we have a decision imposing a $4,700 fine/sanction on a lawyer for (e.g.) calling their adversary a “racist” during a deposition. In Scott-Iverson v. Indep. Health Ass’n, Inc., No. 13-CV-451V(F), 2016 WL 7320067 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2016), the…
Read More Court Imposes $4,700 Fine on Lawyer For (e.g.) Calling Adversary a “Racist” During Employment Discrimination DepositionIn McCullough v. Xerox Corp., No. 12-CV-6405L, 2016 WL 7229134 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 14, 2016), an upstate federal district court denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to her Equal Pay Act (EPA) claim arising out of her employment as a Human Resources Manager. The court summarized the law applicable to plaintiff’s unequal pay claims under the…
Read More Equal Pay Act Claim Survives Summary Judgment, Continues Against Xerox