Adverse Employment Action

In Irons v. The City of New York, 16-cv-3708, 2019 WL 3752870 (EDNY Aug. 8, 2019), the court, inter alia,[1]As with many blog posts, here I have addressed only a subset of this lengthy and detailed decision; the reader is encouraged to review the decision in its entirety. denied defendant City’s motion for summary judgment…

Read More NYPD Sergeant’s Race, Gender Discrimination Claims Survive Summary Judgment

In Vuono v. Consolidated Edison of New York, Inc., 2019 WL 2433654 (S.D.N.Y. 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s disability discrimination claim, finding that allegedly “excessive” drug and alcohol tests did not qualify as adverse employment actions. From the decision: Requiring an employee to be tested pursuant to the On Call program does not…

Read More Drug Testing Was Not an “Adverse Employment Action”, Court Holds

In Simon v. City of New York, 17-cv-9575, 2019 WL 916767 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s disability discrimination claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because she did not sufficiently allege an “adverse employment action.” Specifically, this decision is instructive as to whether and to what extent a schedule…

Read More ADA Disability Discrimination Claim Dismissed; Schedule Change Was Not an “Adverse Employment Action”

In Torres v. New York City Dept. of Education, 18-cv-2156, 2019 WL 2124891 (E.D.N.Y. May 15, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s discrimination and retaliation claims – by granting defendant’s motion for a judgment on the pleadings pursuant to FRCP 12(c) – under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), on the ground that plaintiff…

Read More ADA Claim Dismissed; No “Adverse Employment Action”

In Burgos v. City of New York, 2019 WL 1299461, at *10–11 (S.D.N.Y., 2019), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s retaliation claim – though it did dismiss his claims of discrimination based on his race (Hispanic) and religion (Islam). The court held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged the existence of one or…

Read More Sanitation Worker’s Title VII Retaliation Claim Survives Dismissal Against the City of New York

In Mazzeo v. Mnuchin, 17-cv-2686, 2018 WL 4492847 (2d Cir. Sept. 19, 2018) (Summary Order), the court, inter alia, affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), and the Rehabilitation Act. The court summarized the law: In order to…

Read More Retaliation Claim Properly Dismissed Against IRS; Disciplinary Threat Was Not an “Adverse Employment Action”

Employment discrimination claims are frequently analyzed pursuant to the well-known McDonnell Douglas[1]McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). burden shifting framework. Under that framework, the plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he is…

Read More Office Relocation as an “Adverse Employment Action”

In Adams v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 16-cv-1986, 2018 WL 1532434 (E.D.N.Y. March 29,  2018), the court (inter alia) concluded that plaintiff’s amended complaint sufficiently alleged a “materially adverse employment action” and that plaintiff stated a retaliation claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). From the Opinion: Here, the amended complaint alleges that, on June…

Read More ADA Retaliation Claim Survives Dismissal Against Delta Airlines

In Graham v. Goodwill Industries, Inc., 16-cv-6468, 2018 WL 1318988 (EDNY March 14, 2018), the court held, inter alia, that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff’s sexual harassment claims under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws.[1]The court also, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s hostile work environment claims under Title VII of…

Read More Federal Court Lacked Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over Sexual Harassment Claims Adjudicated at State Agency

In Cardin v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., 16-cv-6101, 2018 WL 562941 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 24, 2018), the court dismissed plaintiff’s employment discrimination claim, due to the absence of an “adverse employment action”, and the facts did not support the requisite inference of discrimination. In sum: believing plaintiff used his cell phone in the bathroom, plaintiff’s…

Read More Short-Lived “Write-Up” Was Not An “Adverse Employment Action”