In Rosas v. Balter Sales Co., Inc. et al, 12-CV-6557, 2018 WL 3199253 (S.D.N.Y. June 29, 2018), the court, inter alia, upheld a jury verdict – i.e., denied defendants’ motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 – in plaintiff’s favor on his race-based hostile work environment claim.[1]The court also…
Read More Hostile Work Environment Claim Survives DismissalIn Rosas v. Balter Sales Co., Inc. et al, 12-CV-6557, 2018 WL 3199253 (S.D.N.Y. June 29, 2018), the court, inter alia, upheld a jury verdict – i.e., denied defendants’ motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 – in plaintiff’s favor on his race discrimination (termination) claim.[1]It also denied defendants’…
Read More Race Discrimination Jury Verdict for Plaintiff UpheldIn Smith v. Centerlight Healthcare, Inc., 17-cv-2135, 2018 WL 3104086 (S.D.N.Y. June 21, 2018), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). After summarizing the legal standard, the court applied the law to the facts,…
Read More Title VII, ADEA Retaliation Claims DismissedIn Collymore v. City of New York et al, 16-cv-8270, 2018 WL 3014093 (S.D.N.Y. June 14, 2018), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim. “Title VII recognizes two forms of sexual harassment: direct discrimination (or ‘quid pro quo’) and ‘hostile workplace environment.’ … In addition to pleading abusive or offensive conduct, it is…
Read More Sexual Harassment Claim Dismissed; Touching Was Not “Because Of” SexIn Emamian v. Rockefeller University, 07-cv-3919, 2018 WL 2849700 (S.D.N.Y. June 8, 2018) – a race/national origin discrimination case – the court held, inter alia, that the jury’s emotional distress damages award of $2 million was excessive, and remitted that award to $200,000. After providing a summary of the relevant “black-letter” law in this area, the…
Read More Court Remits Emotional Distress Damages Award in Employment Discrimination Case From $2M to $200KIn Tantaros v. Fox News Network, LLC et al, 17-cv-2958, 2018 WL 2731268 (SDNY May 18, 2018), the court dismissed, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), plaintiff’s claims under the federal Wiretap Act, as well as intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff alleged, inter alia, “that Defendants physically surveilled her and secretly recorded her…
Read More Court Dismisses “Retaliatory Surveillance” Claim: Tantaros v. Fox NewsIn Mayo-Coleman v. American Sugar Holdings, Inc., 14-cv-79, 2018 WL 2684100 (S.D.N.Y. June 5, 2018), the court, inter alia, held that a $1.7 million jury verdict in plaintiff’s favor on her sexual harassment/hostile work environment claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State Human Rights Law should…
Read More Court Remits Jury Award of $1.7M to $500,000 for Emotional Damages in Sexual Harassment CaseA recent decision, Jackson v. Time Warner Cable Administration LLC, 2018 WL 2371024 (S.D.N.Y. 16-cv-8639 May 18, 2018), illustrates that the proper focus in an employment discrimination case is not whether an employer’s non-discriminatory explanation for the allegedly wrongful action is reliable or true, but rather what motivated the employer. In this case, defendant terminated…
Read More Employment Discrimination Case Against Time Warner Dismissed; Racial Motive Not ShownIn Isbell et al v. City of New York, 2018 WL 2389075 (S.D.N.Y., May 25, 2018), the court (inter alia) denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims under the NYC Human Rights Law (but granted their motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ discrimination claims under federal and state law). In so doing, the court highlights the relative…
Read More Discrimination Claims Survive Under the NYC Human Rights LawIn a decision issued today, Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia Univ. et al v. Donald Trump et al, 17-cv-5205 (S.D.N.Y. May 23, 2018), U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald held that Donald Trump may not, consistent with the First Amendment, “block” Twitter users from his @realDonaldTrump Twitter account based on their political views. From…
Read More Trump Twitter Ban Violates the First Amendment, SDNY Judge Holds