In Naramore v. Mount Sinai Health Sys. Inc., 2022 NY Slip Op 03479 (N.Y. App. Div. 1 Dept. May 31, 2022), a gender discrimination case, the court addressed an issue that frequently arises in litigation, namely, the scope of discovery to which the parties are entitled. In employment discrimination cases, a plaintiff will often attempt…
Read More Court Limits Discovery in Gender Discrimination CaseIn Logan v. Millstone Manor LLC et al, 20-14433 (MAS) (TJB), 2022 WL 1720172 (D.N.J. May 27, 2022), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s hostile work environment sexual harassment claim. (The court also dismissed plaintiff’s “quid pro quo” sexual harassment claim.) From the decision: Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to Logan, his…
Read More Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment Claim Dismissed; “High Bar” Not MetIn Harris v. Sam’s East, Inc., 4:20-CV-176 (CDL), 2022 WL 1631963 (M.D.Ga. May 23, 2022), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim for retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This case illustrates that a retaliation claim may survive, even though the underlying claim –…
Read More Retaliation Claim, Arising From Complaints of Sexual Harassment, Survives Summary JudgmentIn Jones v. CareandWear II, Inc., No. 656428/2020, 75 Misc. 3d 1205(A), 2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 50383(U), 2022 WL 1483791 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. May 10, 2022), the court, inter alia, held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged a claim of gender discrimination and hostile work environment under the New York State and City Human Rights…
Read More Sex/Gender Harassment & Hostile Work Environment Claims Survive Against CareandWear II, Inc.In Chen v. Jewish Bd. of Family and Children’s Services, Inc., No. 525625/18, 2022 WL 1540178 (N.Y. Sup Ct, Kings County May 13, 2022), the court dismissed, on summary judgment, plaintiff’s claims of gender discrimination and hostile work environment asserted under the New York City Human Rights Law. As to plaintiff’s discrimination claim, the court…
Read More Sex/Gender-Based Hostile Work Environment Claim Dismissed; “Insensitive” Comments Amounted to “Petty Slights and Trivial Inconveniences”In a recent decision, Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., 142 S.Ct. 1562 (U.S. April 28, 2022), the U.S. Supreme Court held that emotional distress damages are not recoverable under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), which Congress enacted under the Constitution’s “Spending Clause” (U.S. Constitution, Article…
Read More SCOTUS: Emotional Distress Damages Unavailable Under “Spending Clause” Antidiscrimination LawsIn Haughton v. Ja-Co Foods, Inc. d/b/a Sonic Drive-Ins, No. 1:20-CV-241-SA-DAS, 2022 WL 1498107 (N.D. Miss. May 11, 2022), the court held that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to survive summary judgment on plaintiff’s hostile work sexual harassment claim asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Generally, in order to make out…
Read More Title VII Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment Claim Survives Summary Judgment; Evidence Included Singing “Inappropriate Songs” and “Humping”In Díaz-Zayas v. Municipality of Guaynabo, et al, No. 18-1668 (RAM), 2022 WL 1322657 (D.Puerto Rico April 27, 2022), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s quid pro quo sexual harassment claim asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court summarized the factual allegations, in part, as…
Read More Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Claim, Based on Alleged Conduct of Héctor O’Neill-García, Survives DismissalIn Howard et al v. Cook County Sheriff’s Office et al, No. 17 C 8146, 2022 WL 1404833 (N.D.Ill. May 4, 2022), the court held that plaintiffs – female corrections officers – presented enough evidence to overcome defendants’ motion for summary judgment on their claims of hostile work environment sexual harassment (by detainees) under Title…
Read More Jail Employees’ Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment Claims Survive Summary JudgmentIn Cruse v. Bi-State Development Agency of Missouri-Illinois Metropolitan District, No. 4:20-cv-366-MTS, 2022 WL 1185149 (E.D.Mo. April 21, 2022), the court, inter alia, held that factual issues precluded summary judgment on plaintiff’s claims of sexual harassment. In sum, plaintiff alleged that her supervisor (Brew) sexually harassed her, both in person and by phone, and that…
Read More Sexual Harassment Claim(s) Survive Summary Judgment; Factual Issues Existed as to Whether Harassment Culminated in a “Tangible Employment Action” Etc.