Court: EDNY

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 Bright v. Coca Cola, 12-cv-234 (EDNY Nov. 3, 2014), an employment discrimination case, the Eastern District of New York granted summary judgment in defendant’s favor. Judge Cogan’s decision is instructive regarding the use of depositions in employment litigation. For non-lawyers/litigators, a “deposition” is (briefly and generally speaking) a witness’s out-of-court testimony that is reduced to…

Read More “Have You Identified All Facts Supporting Your Claims?”
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

In Corrado v. New York State Uniform Court System, the Eastern District of New York explained the difference between an “adverse action” for purposes of retaliation and an “adverse action” for purposes of discrimination based on a protected class (so-called disparate treatment). Specifically: To show a prima facie case of retaliation, plaintiff must demonstrate that…

Read More Court Explains Differing Standards for “Adverse Action” Depending on Whether Claim is For Retaliation or Status-Based Employment Discrimination
Share This:
by

As illustrated by a recent federal court decision, a plaintiff may be able to assert false arrest claims against a private individual who makes a false report to the police, resulting in plaintiff’s arrest. In Sanders-Peay v. NYC Dept. of Educ., decided Nov. 18, 2014, the Eastern District of New York held that plaintiff, a Department…

Read More False Arrest Claims, Based on False Statements to Police, Sufficiently Pled
Share This:
by

In Verga v. Emergency Ambulance Service Inc. et al, the Eastern District of New York denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment on his retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State Human Rights Law. Plaintiff, an EMT, alleged that he was fired after complaining about sexual…

Read More Court Finds Sufficient Evidence (at the Summary Judgment Stage) of “But For” Causation in Title VII Retaliation Case
Share This:
by

In Santiesteban v. Nestle Waters North America, Inc. (decided Oct. 15, 2014), the Eastern District of New York denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claims of discrimination and hostile work environment (based on religion). As to plaintiff’s discrimination claim, the court held: [T]he comments that “you people are manipulative,” that “Plaintiff manipulated … Cappetta…

Read More Evidence of Derogatory Comments About Jews Leads to Denial of Summary Judgment in Employment Discrimination Case
Share This:
by

A recent Eastern District decision, Delisi v. National Ass’n of Professional Women, illustrates the circumstances under which an individual defendant – here, defendant’s general counsel – may be liable under the “aiding and abetting” and retaliation provisions of the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL). Generally, plaintiff asserted that she was subjected to sexual harassment, and…

Read More Company’s Alleged Failure to Investigate Discrimination Complaint Supported “Aiding and Abetting” and Retaliation Claims
Share This:
by

The Eastern District’s recent decision in Tate v. Rocketball Ltd (decided 9/18/14) provides some insight into how courts assess discrimination claims arising outside the “typical” employer-employee relationship/setting. Plaintiff, a gay male, worked for a restaurant. Part of his job duties included bringing food and drinks to the Houston Rockets’ locker room while they were at Barclays Center…

Read More Waiter’s Sexual Orientation Discrimination/Hostile Work Environment Claims Dismissed Against Non-Employer Houston Rockets’ Owner
Share This:
by

In EEOC v. Suffolk Laundry Services, 48 F.Supp.3d 497 (2014), the Eastern District of New York denied defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on plaintiffs’ hostile work environment claims. (Here is the complaint and here is the EEOC press release about the lawsuit.) One point this decision makes is that “conduct directed at other employees is part of the…

Read More “Hostile Work Environment” Can Be Shown By Conduct Directed at Other Employees
Share This: