Hostile Work Environment

by

In Crawford v. ExlService.com, LLC, 2019 WL 5887214 (SDNY Nov. 12, 2019), the court, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s hostile work environment claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. The court…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Claim Survives Summary Judgment Against ExlService
by

In Mira v. Harder, 2019 NY Slip Op 08131 (App. Div. 1st Dept. Nov. 12, 2019), the court affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s discrimination, retaliation, and “revenge porn” claims. First, the court held that plaintiff’s discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation claims – asserted under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws –…

Read More Discrimination, Hostile Work Environment, and Revenge Porn Claims Dismissed
by

In a recent decision, Moxley v. State of New York, 17-cv-691, 2019 WL 5788440 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 6, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim. Among plaintiff’s allegations supporting this claim was her contention that her supervisor’s nephews (and co-workers) “g[ave] her dirty looks.” Regarding this allegation, the court explained : Frequent…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Claim Dismissed; Evidence, Including “Threatening Looks”, Insufficient
by

In Petit v. The Department of Education of the City of New York, No. 155523/16, 9984, 2019 WL 5791619 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept., Nov. 07, 2019), the court held that plaintiff stated claims of employment discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. Specifically, the court reversed a…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Claim Stated; Allegations Include “Voodoo Priest” Accusation
by

In James v. Van Blarcum, 2019 WL 5681334 (2d Cir. Nov. 1, 2019) (Summary Order), the court vacated the lower court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ race-based hostile work environment claims. Initially, the court held that the “continuing violations doctrine” applied, permitting consideration of otherwise-time barred conduct: Appellants allege that the Ulster County jail has a policy…

Read More Race-Based Hostile Work Environment Claims Survive Summary Judgment
by

In Ireland v. Rochester Institute of Technology et al, 19-cv-6392, 2019 WL 5538371 (WDNY Oct. 25, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s claim of sexual harassment under the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL).[1]The court dismissed as time barred plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of…

Read More Sexual Harassment Claim Dismissed; “Crude” Comments Held Insufficient Under State Law
by

In Phoenix v New York State Dept. of Health, No. 151915/2015, 2019 WL 5150271 (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Oct. 09, 2019), the court dismissed plaintiff’s constructive discharge and race discrimination claims. As to plaintiff’s constructive discharge claim, the court explained (citations omitted): To state a claim for constructive discharge, plaintiff must allege facts…

Read More Constructive Discharge & Discrimination Claims Dismissed Against NYS Dept. of Health
by

In Alexander v. Equinox Holdings LLC, No. 160323/2018, 2019 WL 4643772, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 32830(U) (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Sep. 18, 2019), the court dismissed plaintiff’s discrimination/harassment claim asserted under the NYC Human Rights Law, NYC. Admin. Code ยง 8-101 et seq. (NYCHRL). Here, the events giving rise to plaintiff’s sex-based hostile…

Read More Off-Duty Employee’s NYCHRL “Customer Harassment” Claim Dismissed
by

In a recent case, Watson v. The Richmond University Medical Center et al, 14-cv-1033, 2019 WL 5087062 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2019), the court, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s Title VII race discrimination claim. From the decision (some citations omitted): [C]onstruing the facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, a…

Read More Race-Based Hostile Work Environment Claim Survives Summary Judgment; Court Cites “Humiliating” Duties