CPLR 3211(a)(7)

by

In Santiago-Mendez v. City of New York, 2016 WL 416877 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dept. Feb. 4, 2016), the court held that plaintiff’s non-time-barred claims for race, national origin, and gender discrimination as against the City of New York and two individual defendants should not have been dismissed. Here is the Order appealed from; here is plaintiff’s complaint. From the…

Read More Decision: NYPD Detective’s Race, National Origin, and Gender Discrimination Claims Proceed
Share This:
by

In Self v. Mixmaster, LLC, 2015 NY Slip Op 31938(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Kings Cty. Oct. 19, 2015), the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s NYC Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) (sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and retaliation), intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims. Defendants argued that plaintiff’s claims under…

Read More Sexual Harassment Etc. Claims Against Mixmaster Survive Motion to Dismiss Based on Geographical Reach of NYC Human Rights Law
Share This:
by

A recent New York Supreme Court case, Spellman v. Gucci Am. Inc., 2015 NY Slip Op 31728(U) (Sup. Ct. NY Cty. Sept. 11, 2015), illustrates that “hostility” disconnected from the plaintiff’s protected class is insufficient to state a cause of action, even under the relatively broad NYC Human Rights Law. The court dismissed plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim…

Read More Alleged Threats of Death and Termination Insufficient to Allege a Cause of Action for a Hostile Work Environment Under the NYC Human Rights Law
Share This:
by

In Anderson v. Edmiston & Co., Inc. (App. Div. 1st Dept. Aug. 4, 2015), the court held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged claims of gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under the NYC Human Rights Law, and affirmed Supreme Court’s denial of defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint under CPLR 3211(a)(7). Plaintiff alleged, among other things, that her superior…

Read More Allegations of Vulgar Remarks About Women Sufficient to Plead Gender Discrimination and Hostile Work Environment
Share This:
by

In Schwarz v. Consolidated Edison, Inc., 2015 NY Slip Op 25258 (Sup. Ct. NY Cty. Aug. 3, 2015), the court dismissed the discrimination complaint brought by Charles Schwartz against Con Edison under CPLR 3211(a)(7) for failure to state a claim. Mr. Schwartz – one of the police officers involved with the Abner Louima case (and who…

Read More Court Dismisses Abner Louima Officer’s Conviction Discrimination Complaint Against ConEd
Share This:
by

In a somewhat unusual departure from my typical blog posts, this one is about a cease-and-desist letter addressed to me personally. The letter (here, with selected exhibits and below), from Florida lawyer Casey Cummings of Florida law firm Kenner & Cummings PLLC, asserts that a blog post I published on June 3, 2014 is “defamatory”, asks me “kindly” to take…

Read More My Response to a Cease-and-Desist Letter
Share This:
by

In Burhans and Rivera v. The State of New York (Sup. NY Index 152906/14), New York Supreme Court Judge Wooten held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged sexual harassment/hostile work environment (but not sex discrimination) claims against the defendant State. Plaintiffs allege in their complaint that, under the New York State Human Rights Law, the State of New…

Read More Burhans/Rivera Sexual Harassment/Hostile Work Environment Claims Continue Against New York State
Share This:
by

In Bennett v. Time Warner Cable, the Supreme Court, New York County, held that plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded age discrimination claims under both a “disparate treatment” and “disparate impact” theory. Here are the alleged facts, as summarized by the court: Plaintiffs, whose ages range between 51 and 69, are employees of TWC, and until about September…

Read More Plaintiffs Sufficiently Allege “Disparate Treatment” and “Disparate Impact” Age Discrimination Claims Against Time Warner Cable
Share This:
by

Santiago v. Dept. of Education illustrates that in an employment discrimination case, the plaintiff must plausibly allege an “adverse employment action.” The quintessential “adverse employment action” is, of course, termination. However, other actions short of termination may qualify. Plaintiff – an itinerant attendance teacher – alleged disparate treatment and a hostile work environment under the…

Read More Employment Discrimination Lawsuit Dismissed; No “Adverse Action”
Share This:
by

In Lee v. Woori Bank (decided Aug. 21, 2014), the New York Supreme Court held that plaintiff adequately pleaded a negligent hiring and retention claim. In this case, plaintiffs asserted claims for retaliation, battery, negligence, and sexual harassment. Specifically, they alleged that Mr. Yoo, along with five other managers and executives from Korea, consistently used foul…

Read More Negligent Hiring and Retention Claims Continue Against Korean Bank
Share This: