Sexual Harassment

In Collymore v. City of New York et al, 18-2099 (2d Cir. April 11, 2019) (Summary Order), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, inter alia, affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court wrote: Collymore alleges that Lisa Maluf, her…

Read More Sexual Harassment Claim Dismissal Affirmed; Touching Not Shown to be “Because of” Plaintiff’s Sex

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

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

Last year, New York enacted several pieces of legislation that enhance protections for sexual harassment victims. One such provision, codified in CPLR 7515, prohibits (with certain exceptions) mandatory arbitration of sexual harassment claims. The law provides, in full: (a) Definitions. As used in this section: 1. The term “employer” shall have the same meaning as…

Read More New York Law Prohibiting Mandatory Arbitration in Sexual Harassment Cases

A (relatively) recent (April 12, 2018) New York State law, Executive Law ยงย  296-d, explicitly prohibits sexual harassment directed at non-employees. The law provides: It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to permit sexual harassment of non-employees in its workplace. An employer may be held liable to a non-employee who is a…

Read More New York Law Prohibiting Sexual Harassment Relating to Non-Employees

In Constance Felice, appellant, v Metropolitan Diagnostic Imaging Group, LLC, et al., respondents, et al., defendant., No. 2016/10529 (Index No. 4471/11), 2019 WL 1272557 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept., Mar. 20, 2019) – an employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation case – the court precluded plaintiff from using at trial certain audio files that were the subject…

Read More Audio Files, Not Produced, Precluded in Sexual Harassment Case

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

The IRS has addressed and clarified an ambiguity in a recently-enacted tax law that relates to deductions of attorney fees in sexual harassment cases, where a nondisclosure agreement is in play. Section 162(q) of the Internal Revenue Code provides: (q) Payments related to sexual harassment and sexual abuse No deduction shall be allowed under this…

Read More IRS Clarifies Ambiguity in New Deduction Section Relating to Confidential Settlements in Sexual Harassment Cases