In Depamphilis v. Town of Newington et al, No. 3:25-CV-00524 (SVN), 2026 WL 674501 (D. Conn. Mar. 10, 2026), the court, inter alia, held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged that she suffered a hostile work environment based on her sex. The court summarized the legal requirements for this claim as follows: Title VII of the Civil…
Read More Sex-Based Hostile Work Environment Claim Survives Dismissal, Court HoldsIn Marquis v. Philadelphia Gas Works, No. 2:25-CV-07005-JDW, 2026 WL 711802 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 13, 2026), the court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s sex-based hostile work environment claim asserted under Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964. From the decision: During her time at PGW, Ms. Marquis experienced various workplace incidents that…
Read More Sex-Based Hostile Work Environment Claim Survives DismissalIn Lara-Nieves v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico et al, No. CV 24-1358 (RAM), 2026 WL 658905 (D.P.R. Mar. 9, 2026), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion dismiss plaintiff’s hostile work environment sexual harassment claim asserted under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. After summarizing the black-letter law – including the principle that…
Read More Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment 14th Amendment Equal Protection Claim Survives DismissalIn Memmer v. United Wholesale Mortgage, No. 23-CV-10921, 2026 WL 561393, at *8 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 27, 2026), the court, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint, finding that plaintiff’s claims did not trigger the application of the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of…
Read More Sexual Harassment Insufficiently Alleged; EFAA Inapplicable; Arbitration CompelledIn Toomey v. One Equity Partners, No. 24-CV-04088 (MMG), 2026 WL 458244 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 18, 2026), the court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration under the Ending Forced Arbitration Act (“EFAA”). Initially, the court held that “a plaintiff may invoke the EFAA to avoid a mandatory arbitration provision by plausibly alleging a claim of sexual…
Read More Sexual Harassment Sufficiently Alleged Under NYCHRL; Motion to Compel Arbitration Denied Under EFAAIn Kutagula v. Matterport, Inc., No. 25-CV-05383-NC, 2026 WL 478343 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 19, 2026), the court, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA) did not apply. From the decision: Plaintiff’s allegations, while concerning if true and may describe sex…
Read More Allegations, While Concerning, Did Not Amount to Sexual Harassment Triggering EFAA Protection From ArbitrationAh, Valentine’s Day. For many, it’s a day for romance, red roses, and heart-shaped boxes of chocolates. But for me, an NYC plaintiff/employee-side sexual harassment lawyer, it’s often a day that sends a shiver down my spine. Why? Because while Cupid might be aiming for love, sometimes his arrows land squarely in the realm of…
Read More Roses, Chocolates, and HR Complaints: Navigating Valentine’s Day in the NYC WorkplaceIn Egan v. Ballantyne Country Club, No. 3:25-CV-00373-KDB-DCK, 2026 WL 377867 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 11, 2026), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s claim of quid pro quo sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. From the decision: In her next claim, Egan alleges that BCC violated Title VII when Dougherty made…
Read More Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Claim Dismissed; Court Cites Failure to Allege Exercise of Authority to Alter Term or Condition of EmploymentIn Swanson v. Dr. Don Chapman, DDS, PLLC, No. CV 24-1622, 2026 WL 318971 (W.D. Pa. Feb. 6, 2026), a sexual harassment case, the court denied defendants’ motion in limine to exclude two instances of alleged sexual misconduct. The court held that the evidence was relevant under Federal Rule of Evidence 401, and not subject to…
Read More Motions in Limine Denied; Sexual Harassment Evidence Was Relevant and Not Unfairly PrejudicialIn Palermo v. Luxor Staffing, Inc., No. 3:25-CV-00499, 2026 WL 300771 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 4, 2026), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s sex-based hostile work environment claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court summarized the following allegations from plaintiff’s complaint: 19. The harassment was both…
Read More Sexual Harassment Claim Survives Dismissal; Allegations Included Physical Assault and Verbal Harassment