Court: NY Supreme NY

by

In Cook v. Emblem Health Services Co., LLC,2018 NY Slip Op 30460(U), 2018 WL 1399351 (N.Y.Sup. Ct. March 16, 2018), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s race discrimination claim. In reaching this conclusion, it addressed the use of so-called “racially coded” language – i.e., language that is facially benign but that may actually have a…

Read More Race Discrimination Claim Dismissed Against Emblem Health, Notwithstanding Alleged Use of “Racially Coded” Language
Share This:
by

In Stoica v. Phipps, 2018 WL 1226045 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. Index No. 153834/2017, March 8, 2018) (J. Lebovits), the court, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s hostile work environment sexual harassment claims under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws.[1]It also held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged various other claims, including…

Read More Nanny Sufficiently Alleges Hostile Work Environment / Sexual Harassment; Claims Were Not “Too Outrageous and Incredible to be Believed”
Share This:
by

In Rodrigues v. Watershed Ventures LLC, 2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 30322(U), 2018 WL 1030303 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Feb. 23, 2018), the court held, inter alia, that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged a claim for discrimination under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. The court explained the applicable legal standards: In employment discrimination actions brought pursuant…

Read More Race Discrimination Claim Sufficiently Alleged Against Watershed Ventures
Share This:
by

In Vasquez v. Manhattan Physician Group, 2018 WL 587135, 2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 30157(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Jan. 29, 2018), the court denied the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant, a medical office, on plaintiff’s claim of sexual harassment under the New York City Human Rights Law. In sum, this cases arose from the…

Read More Public Accommodation Sexual Harassment is Actionable Under the NYC Human Rights Law, Court Holds
Share This:
by

In Jarrett v. Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transportation Operating Authority, 2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 32701(U), 2017 WL 6610409 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty., 150116/2017 Dec. 18, 2017) (J. Sokoloff), the court explained and applied the “continuing violation doctrine” in the context of plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims under the New York State and City Human Rights…

Read More Court Finds “Continuing Violation Doctrine” Inapplicable to Complaint’s NYS and NYC Human Rights Law Claims
Share This:
by

In Ryan v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 2017 NY Slip Op 32627(U) (Sup. Ct. NY Cty. Index 152457 /17 Dec. 15, 2017), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s New York Labor Law 740 whistleblower claim. This action arose from an incident in which plaintiff was “attacked and forcibly pushed” by another employee, resulting in…

Read More Whistleblower Claim Dismissed; Workplace Violence Was Not a “Public Hazard”
Share This:
by

In Petit v. Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 2017 NY Slip Op 32541(U), 155523/2016 (Sup. Ct. NY Cty. Dec. 1, 2017), the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims for discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation in violation of the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. Here I will discuss the court’s evaluation of plaintiff’s discrimination…

Read More Transfer to “Absent Teacher Reserve” Was Not an “Adverse Employment Action”; Discrimination Claim Dismissed
Share This:
by

In Volpe v. Paniccioli, 2017 NY Slip Op 51554(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Sup. Cty. Nov. 15, 2017), a case involving allegations of (inter alia) sexual harassment, the court denied the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendant’s counterclaims for, e.g., defamation. By her motion, plaintiff “contends that the statements she has made are absolutely privileged as they were made…

Read More Court in Sexual Harassment Case Holds That Providing Information to Press Was Not “Absolutely Privileged”; Denies Motion to Dismiss Defamation Counterclaim
Share This:
by

From Ortiz v. Gazes, LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op 32339(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. 150876/2015 Oct. 30, 2017): Defendants have articulated legitimate reasons for terminating plaintiff by pointing to, among other things, plaintiff’s chronic absences, lateness and her inability to handle some of the work necessary. However, defendants acknowledge that they did not address attendance issues with…

Read More Gender/Pregnancy Discrimination Case Survives Summary Judgment
Share This: