In a recent decision, Harris, Katherine Brooks et al v. Charlie Rose et al, Sup. Ct. NY Cty. Index No. 154172/2018 (filed Oct. 10, 2019), the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ cause of action for retaliation under the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-101 et seq. The court…
Read More Court Dismisses NYCHRL Retaliation Claim Against Charlie RoseIn Murphy v. City of Newburgh, 2019 WL 4855691 (2d Cir. Oct. 2, 2019) (Summary Order), the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s retaliation claim asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. While plaintiff did complain of certain treatment, her complaints did not amount to legally-actionable “protected activity.” The court…
Read More 2d Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Title VII Retaliation Claim; Disconnect From Gender Means No “Protected Activity”In Crookendale v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 2019 NY Slip Op 06446 (App. Div. 1st Dept. Sept. 3, 2019), the court held that plaintiff’s NYC Human Rights Law gender discrimination should not have been dismissed. From the decision: The motion court should not have dismissed the claim of gender discrimination while sustaining…
Read More NYCHRL Gender Discrimination Claim Should Not Have Been Dismissed, 1st Department HoldsRetaliation, in the employment discrimination context, has a very specific meaning – namely, subjecting an employee to one or more “adverse employment actions” because the employee engaged in “protected activity.” Frequently, retaliation occurs during the course of employment. But what about retaliation after the employee has left the employer? Courts recognize that “Title VII prohibits…
Read More Post-Employment Retaliation; “Blacklisting”In Jordan v. United Health Group Inc., No. 18-2268, 2019 WL 4071943 (2d Cir. Aug. 29, 2019) (Summary Order), the Second Circuit, inter alia, affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s retaliation claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Here, plaintiff contends that she was terminated in retaliation for filing a charge with…
Read More 2d Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Title VII Retaliation Claim; More Than One-Year Gap Too Attenuated to Show CausationIn a particularly disturbing development, it is reported that a plaintiff in a wage-and-hour FLSA lawsuit – plaintiff Xue Hui Zhang, suing his former employer, Albany restaurant Ichiban, for $200,000 in back wages – was detained by Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents during a deposition. As indicated in the above-linked news article (dated August…
Read More FLSA Plaintiff Detained by ICE During DepositionIn Young v. Town of Islip et al, 2019 WL 3412113 (E.D.N.Y. July 29, 2019) – in which plaintiff asserted, inter alia, claims of race discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – the court denied plaintiff’s motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Civil…
Read More Verdict Sheet Did Not Confuse Jury in Race Discrimination/Hostile Work Environment Claim, Court HoldsIn Borzon v. Green, et al., 18-2211 (2d Cir. July 2, 2019) (Summary Order), the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s race discrimination and retaliation claims under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights ACt of 1964. Plaintiff, who is white, alleged that shortly after his hiring, defendant was hired to serve as plaintiff’s…
Read More 2nd Circuit, Citing Negative Performance Reviews, Affirms Dismissal of White Plaintiff’s Title VII Discrimination and Retaliation ClaimsIn Osuan v. City of New York et al, 2019 WL 2544866, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. June 20, 2019), the court, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claim of retaliation under 42 U.S.C. 1981. From the decision: Here, Osuan lodged a complaint with human resources about Martin’s behavior and was terminated without explanation only…
Read More Section 1981 Retaliation Claim Sufficiently Alleged; Termination Two Weeks After HR Complaint Plausibly Indicated CausationIn Olivier v. County of Rockland et al, No. 15-CV-8337 (KMK), 2019 WL 2502349 (SDNY June 17, 2019), the court held that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to overcome defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The court explained the legal standard applicable to the third (“pretext”) step of the three-step burden-shifting framework applicable to Title VII retaliation…
Read More Retaliation Claim Survives Summary Judgment; Court Cites (e.g.) Weaknesses and Inconsistencies in Defendants’ Proffered Non-Retaliatory Reasons