Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment

by

In Kane v. Club Helsinki, 18-cv-01355, 2021 WL 2457150 (N.D.N.Y. June 16, 2021), the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s quid pro quo sexual harassment claim. In sum, plaintiff, a bartender, alleges that after he rebuffing sexual advances from defendant’s director of operations (Sullivan), his hours were cut and he was terminated. The court…

Read More Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Claim Against Club Helsinki Survives Summary Judgment; Inconsistent Reasons For Termination Created Triable Issues of Fact as to Pretext
Share This:
by

In Perrotte v. Bloomberg, LP et al, No. 451470/2020, 2021 WL 465986 (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Feb. 09, 2021), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s “quid pro quo” sexual harassment claim asserted under the New York State Human Rights Law. The court summarized the law as follows: Pursuant to NYSHRL, it is an…

Read More Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Claim Dismissed Against Bloomberg LP et al
Share This:
by

In Mejia v. City of New York, 2020 WL 2837008, at *14 (E.D.N.Y. May 30, 2020), the court, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s quid pro quo sexual harassment claim. From the decision: Plaintiff asserts claims for quid pro quo sexual harassment under NYSHRL and NYCHRL. Quid pro quo sexual harassment occurs when…

Read More Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Claim Dismissed; Court Cites Absence of Action Following Rejection of Sexual Overture
Share This:
by

In Canosa v. Harvey Weinstein et al, 2019 WL 498865 (S.D.N.Y. 2019), the court, inter alia, clarified that sexual harassment is a form of “discrimination” under federal law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) and the New York State and City Human Rights Laws, and does not constitute an independent common-law tort.…

Read More Sexual Harassment is a Statutory Claim, Not a Common-Law Tort, Court Explains
Share This:
by

In Rice v. Smithtown Volkswagen, 2018 WL 3848923 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 13, 2018), the court held that plaintiff sufficiently pleaded claims for “quid pro quo” sexual harassment, hostile work environment sexual harassment, and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (In this post I will discuss the court’s assessment of plaintiff’s “quid pro…

Read More Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Claim Stated Against Smithtown Volkswagen
Share This:
by

In a recent decision, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Draper Development LLC, 15-cv-877, 2018 WL 3384427 (N.D.N.Y. July 11, 2018) – a quid pro quo sexual harassment case – the court denied the parties’ (including defendant’s) motion for summary judgment. This case arose from a the denial of employment of two female applicants (J.J. and A.R.) and…

Read More “Sex For Job” Text Message Supports Sexual Harassment Claim; Summary Judgment Denied
Share This:
by

In 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” Sex
Share This:
by

In Kenney v. State of New York, Office of Children and Family Services, 16-cv-4522, 2017 WL 5633166 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 20, 2017), the court dismissed plaintiff’s “quid pro quo” sexual harassment claim.[1]In the same opinion, the court denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s “hostile work environment” claim; I discussed that aspect of the decision…

Read More Court Dismisses “Quid Pro Quo” Sexual Harassment Claim; Tangible Employment Action Missing
Share This:
by

In Patrizia Pelgrift, et al., Plaintiffs, v. 335 W. 41st Tavern Inc., et al., Defendants. Additional Party Names: David Sheeran, Iryna Lutsenko, Valeriya Kolisnyk, 2017 WL 4712482, at *10 (S.D.N.Y., 2017), the court held, inter alia, that a default judgment on plaintiff’s sexual harassment claims was warranted. The court summarized the law as follows: Under…

Read More Sexual Harassment Default Judgment Warranted Under “Quid Pro Quo” and “Hostile Work Environment” Theories/Paradigms
Share This: