Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment

In Shalom v. Hunter Coll. of City Univ. of New York, No. 14-3426-CV, 2016 WL 1358607 (2d Cir. Apr. 6, 2016), the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s claims under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. § 1681) for (1) quid pro quo sexual harassment, (2) hostile educational environment,…

Read More Second Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Title IX Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment, Hostile Educational Environment, and Retaliation Claims

In a lawsuit filed this week, captioned Villalta v. JS Barkats PLLC and Sunny Barkats, 16-cv-2772 (SDNY filed April 13, 2016), plaintiff asserts claims of gender discrimination and quid pro quo and hostile work environment sexual harassment against a Manhattan law firm and its owner. Plaintiff alleges, among other things: Defendant [Sunny] Barkats exploited Plaintiff, who…

Read More Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Against Manhattan Law Firm JS Barkats PLLC

In Bouveng v. NYG Capital LLC et al, No. 14 CIV. 5474 (PGG), 2016 WL 1312139 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2016), Judge Gardephe – in a lengthy and thoughtful opinion – ruled on defendants’ post-trial motions following a jury’s verdict in favor of, and considerable award to, Hanna Bouveng in her sexual harassment lawsuit against various…

Read More SDNY Upholds Jury Verdict in Favor of Hanna Bouveng on Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Claims Against Benjamin Wey et al

In a lawsuit recently filed in Manhattan federal court (Ravina v. Columbia University, 16-cv-02137), the plaintiff – an Assistant Professor of Finance at Columbia University – alleges (among other things) that after enduring quid pro quo sexual harassment by a tenured professor, “Columbia refused to stop his discriminatory behavior”, “allowed [plaintiff] to continue to be victimized…

Read More Professor Files Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit Against Columbia University

In Llanos v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 132 A.D.3d 823, 824, 18 N.Y.S.3d 666, 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dept. 2015), the Second Dept. reversed a state court decision dismissing plaintiff’s claims under section 8-107 of the NYC Administrative Code (aka the NYC Human Rights Law/NYCHRL). Plaintiff alleged in her complaint that she was subjected to employment discrimination, quid…

Read More Discrimination Claims Under Comparatively Broad NYC Human Rights Law Were Not Duplicative of State Law Claims

In Lekettey v. City of New York, No. 15-1169-CV, 2016 WL 482109 (2d Cir. Feb. 8, 2016), the court affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint alleging sexual harassment. There are generally two theories of sexual harassment recognized under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: (1) “quid pro quo” sexual harassment,…

Read More Sexual Harassment Allegations Insufficiently Alleged, Notwithstanding Assertion of “Fondling”

In a lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court on January 19, 2016, Mikolaenko v. NYU School of Medicine et al (16-cv-00413), plaintiff – a doctor – asserts (among other things) that her supervisor threatened to give her poor reviews and terminate her unless she had sex with him, propositioned plaintiff for sex, and made inappropriate…

Read More Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Against NYU School of Medicine and Others

In New York, particularly New York City, employees are protected against discrimination (including sexual harassment and retaliation) by various laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Although these laws are similar in some respects, they differ…

Read More Individual Liability For Sexual Harassment Requires Participation, Court Holds