NYC Human Rights Law

In Automatic Meter Reading Corp. v. New York City, No. 162211/2015, 63 Misc. 3d 1211(A), 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 50464(U), 2019 WL 1475080 (Sup Ct, Feb. 28, 2019), the court, inter alia, affirmed and enforced the New York City Commission on Human Rights’ finding of sexual harassment-based constructive discharge. From the decision: The NYCCHR found…

Read More Court Upholds NYCCHR Finding of Constructive Discharge
Share This:

In Escobar v. Tutor Perini Corp. 2019 NY Slip Op 31020(U), 152524/2018 (Sup. Ct. NY Cty. April 8, 2019) (J. Freed), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s discrimination claims, advanced under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws under an “aiding and abetting” theory. The court wrote: To be held liable as an…

Read More Court Dismisses “Aiding and Abetting” Discrimination Claim
Share This:

In Fields v The Dept. of Educ. of the City of New York, No. 154283/2016, 2019 WL 1580151, at *3, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 30955(U) (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Apr. 12, 2019), the court dismissed plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim because it was not included in plaintiff’s Notice of Claim, and therefore plaintiff…

Read More Hostile Work Environment, Discrimination Claims Dismissed Against NYC Dept. of Education
Share This:

The New York City Council recently passed a Local Law, Int. 1445-2019, that will ban pre-employment testing for marijuana usage. Specifically, it amends sections 8-102 and 8-107 of the New York City Administrative Code. The Council summarizes the legislation as follows: This proposed bill would prohibit New York City employers from requiring a prospective employee…

Read More NYC Council Bans Marijuana Testing of Prospective Employees
Share This:

In Ravina v. Columbia University and Geert Bekaert, 16-cv-2137, 2019 WL 1450449 (S.D.N.Y. March 31, 2019), a sexual harassment/retaliation case, the court – in addition to denying defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff’s retaliation claim – next evaluated the jury’s damage awards to plaintiff ($750,000 in emotional distress damages, $500,000…

Read More Court Remits $750,000 Award for Emotional Distress Damages in Retaliation/Sexual Harassment Case Against Columbia University
Share This:

In Ravina v. Columbia University and Geert Bekaert, 16-cv-2137, 2019 WL 1450449 (S.D.N.Y. March 31, 2019), a sexual harassment/retaliation case, the court denied defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff’s retaliation claim, but granted its motion for remittitur as to the jury’s damage awards for compensatory/emotional distress damages and punitive damages.…

Read More Jury Verdict of Retaliation for Complaints of Sexual Harassment Against Columbia University Professor Upheld
Share This:

From Rapaport v Strategic Financial Solutions LLC, No. 152764/18, 2019 WL 1247132 (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Mar. 15, 2019): The motion as to Action 1 is denied. In that action, plaintiff claims that while she was pregnant, defendants unlawfully reclassified her from a full-time employee to a part-time consultant when they acquired her…

Read More Pregnancy Discrimination, Religious-Based Hostile Work Environment Claims Survive Dismissal
Share This:

In Woolcock v. Lukes-Roosevelt, No. 518301/2016, 2019 WL 1206356 (N.Y. Sup Ct, Kings County Mar. 11, 2019), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s hostile work environment sexual harassment claim under the NYC Human Rights Law. From the decision: [D]efendant fails to set forth that a reasonable victim of discrimination…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment Claim Against Mt. Sinai St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Survives Summary Judgment
Share This:

In McCabe v Consulate General of Canada, No. 101565/15, 8619, 8620, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 01651, 2019 WL 1064104 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept., Mar. 07, 2019), the court, inter alia, affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s sex and age discrimination claims under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. From the decision: The court properly…

Read More Reduction in Force Coupled With Retention of Others Not in Plaintiff’s Protected Class Insufficient to State Claims of Age and Gender Discrimination
Share This: