COVID-19 Updates and Legal Services

Articles Posted in Employment Discrimination

People discriminated against in the workplace on the basis of religion are often able to pursue claims against their employers for violating Title VII.  Prior to filing a civil lawsuit, however, an aggrieved employee must exhaust any administrative remedies, and the failure to do so may result in the dismissal of the case. This was demonstrated in a recent New York opinion, in which the court ultimately dismissed the plaintiff’s religious discrimination claims. If you were subject to unjust treatment in the workplace because of your religion, you might be able to recover damages, and it is prudent to speak to a knowledgeable New York employment discrimination lawyer regarding your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff worked as a volunteer firefighter for the defendant fire department. He was suspended following allegations that he bullied another firefighter. At the completion of the investigation, he was removed from the defendant’s membership rolls. He then filed an employment discrimination claim against the defendant, alleging he was treated adversely due to his religion in violation of Title VII. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint on the basis that he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required under the law. The court allowed limited discovery on the issue prior to ruling on the matter.

Consequences of the Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies

Prior to pursuing a Title VII claim in federal court, an aggrieved employee must generally exhaust his or her administrative remedies by filing a discrimination charge with the EEOC. The purpose of this requirement is to give the administrative agency the opportunity to investigate the claim and potentially mediate and take remedial action. Continue reading

Many people who are subjected to discrimination in the workplace are either terminated or quit because they can no longer tolerate being treated unjustly. However, some people choose to report discriminatory practices to human resources or other supervisory individuals and remain in their place of employment. It is not uncommon for people who report discrimination to face additional adverse consequences from vengeful employers. Retaliation is unlawful, however, and employers who try to punish employees for reporting discrimination may be liable for additional damages, as discussed in a recent New York opinion. If your employer took adverse actions against you after you reported discrimination, it is prudent to speak to a trusted New York employment discrimination lawyer about your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Treatment

Allegedly, the plaintiff worked as a professor for the defendant college for approximately twenty years. In the last three years of her employment, she faced discrimination based on her age, race, and gender from students and co-workers. She filed a formal complaint in March 2018, arguing the defendant engaged in discriminatory behavior and created a hostile work environment. Two months later, she was denied re-appointment to her position.

Reportedly, the plaintiff then filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against the defendant, alleging in part that she was denied re-appointment in retaliation for her March 2018 complaint, in violation of federal law. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety. Continue reading

Employers are prohibited from discriminating against people based on their gender or engaging in sexual harassment, and employers that fail to abide by anti-discrimination laws and violate their employee’s rights may be deemed liable for any damages they cause. In some instances, employees must provide prompt notice of sexual harassment claims to their employers, and if they fail to do so, their claims may be dismissed. This was shown in a recent New York opinion in which the court explained the plaintiff’s discrimination claims arising out of violations of state law due to the plaintiff’s failure to provide proper notice to the defendant were untimely. If you were sexually harassed at work, you may be owed damages, and it is in your best interest to consult a New York sexual harassment attorney as soon as possible.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

Reportedly, the plaintiff worked as a police officer for the defendant town. Throughout the course of her eight-year employment, she was subjected to harassment and discrimination based on her gender and subjected to retaliation for reporting such unlawful acts. The ongoing treatment caused her to suffer physical, emotional, and psychological distress. Thus, she filed a lawsuit against the defendant, alleging claims of gender-based discrimination and retaliation in violation of state and federal anti-discrimination laws, as well as other tort claims. The defendant removed the case to federal court, and the plaintiff filed a motion to remand. After reviewing the motion, the court ultimately denied it as to the plaintiff’s state law discrimination claims.

Timely Notice of Discrimination Claims

The court noted that both parties agreed that the discrimination claims arising out of state and federal law violations should be litigated together. The plaintiff argued that the court should decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, though, because the issue of whether she was required to serve a notice of claim prior to asserting state law discrimination claims was a novel issue that should be determined by a state court. Continue reading

In employment discrimination cases, the testimony of the plaintiff and other key witnesses is usually essential to proving or refuting liability. While depositions can normally be completed within a day, in some instances, multiple days are required to fully obtain relevant information. Recently, a New York court discussed when depositions could be extended past a day in an employment discrimination case. If you are the victim of discrimination in the workplace, it is advisable to consult a New York employment discrimination attorney to determine your potential claims.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against the defendant banking corporation for unspecified reasons. During the course of discovery, depositions were conducted, including the plaintiff’s. The parties agreed to allow the plaintiff’s deposition to continue for a second day, to allow the defendant’s counsel to fully and fairly obtain his testimony. Prior to the continued deposition, though, the plaintiff’s counsel stated that he would only allow for the plaintiff’s continued deposition if the defendant made one of its witnesses available for a second day of testimony as well. Thus, the defendant filed a motion to compel the plaintiff’s continued deposition.

Depositions in Federal Employment Discrimination Cases

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a deposition can be extended if more time is needed to fairly examine the witness. The need to allow additional time for critical depositions is well established and has been upheld by numerous courts. In the subject case, the plaintiff’s complaint had close to one hundred and fifty paragraphs. Thus, the court stated that ample time was needed to question him on his assertions as well as the facts alleged by the defendant in its affirmative defenses. Continue reading

There are numerous statutes that protect New York employees from being treated unfairly at work, including wage and hour laws. Thus, employers that fail to pay employees fair wages or provide workers with wage notices may be held accountable for civil damages. Frequently, employers who violate wage laws will fail to comply with other statutes designed to protect workers as well, which is also actionable. In a recent ruling, a district court sitting in New York discussed whether it could exercise jurisdiction over state law claims brought in the same matter as wage claims. If you believe your employer violated your wage rights, you should speak to a skilled New York wage and hour claim attorney to discuss your options.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

Reportedly, the plaintiff worked as a waitress for the defendant restaurant. Throughout her employment, she was paid per shift. The defendant never provided her with wage statements or wage notices. The defendant also did not pay her spread of hours pay, as required by New York’s labor laws. She worked for the defendant for approximately three years before she informed her manager that she was pregnant.

It is alleged that the plaintiff did not request any accommodations for her pregnancy but was ultimately terminated regardless. She filed a federal lawsuit against the defendant, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York State wage and labor laws, as well as claims of unlawful discharge in violation of New York State and City human rights laws. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. In reviewing the motions, the court addressed, in part, whether it could exercise jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s state law claims.

Continue reading

People from a variety of ethnic backgrounds work in New York. While garnering the experiences and knowledge from a diverse group of people is one of the greatest advantages of working in an urban environment, racial discrimination is, unfortunately, a problem in many workplaces. While victims of employment discrimination can seek redress via the courts, they must produce sufficient evidence of discriminatory acts to recover damages. Recently, a New York court discussed the evidence a plaintiff needs to prove disparate treatment in a case alleging racial discrimination. If you were subject to discriminatory acts at work, you might be owed compensation, and it is in your best interest to speak with a seasoned New York employment discrimination attorney to discuss your possible claims.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff worked at the defendant university as a history professor. The plaintiff, who was of Indian descent, faced extensive obstacles in obtaining tenure and was repeatedly denied distinguished professor status. He filed a lawsuit against the defendant alleging numerous claims of discrimination in violation of state and federal law, including a claim that he was subject to disparate treatment due to the defendant’s failure to renew his salary supplement. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims in their entirety. After reviewing the plaintiff’s complaint, the court granted the defendant’s motion.

Evidence Needed to Prove Disparate Treatment

In part, the defendant argued that the plaintiff’s disparate treatment was implausible under Title VII. The plaintiff did not counter the defendant’s argument, and therefore, the court deemed the claim abandoned. The court stated, however, that even if it was not abandoned, it lacked merit and should be dismissed.

Continue reading

In employment discrimination cases in New York, a plaintiff will often allege that an employer treated the plaintiff differently than other employees in similar situations or positions. In such instances, evidence of such unequal treatment is critical to proving an employer’s liability. Employers may be reluctant to share certain documents and records, however, and may argue that they are either irrelevant or privileged. A plaintiff’s right to obtain materials necessary to the prosecution of a case were discussed in an opinion recently delivered by a New York court, in which an employer objected to the employee’s discovery requests seeking employment records. If you are the victim of discrimination in the workplace, it is advisable to meet with a trusted New York employment harassment attorney to assess what evidence you may need to prove liability.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations and Discovery Requests

Reportedly, the plaintiff was employed by the defendant as a safety manager on a project involving the renovation of a train station. The plaintiff was terminated approximately two months after she was hired. The defendant cited habitual lateness and other issues pertaining to the plaintiff’s performance as the reason she was terminated. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant, alleging that her supervisor sexually harassed her throughout the course of her employment, and her rejection of his advances was the actual reason for her termination.

Allegedly, during the course of litigation, the plaintiff sent the defendant discovery requests, seeking documents regarding other employees who had engaged in or been terminated for engaging in the same conduct that the defendant alleged led to the plaintiff’s firing. The defendant opposed the requests, and the plaintiff filed a motion to compel. The court granted the motion in part, only ordering the defendant to produce information regarding other employees who were terminated for the same reason as the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed.

Continue reading

Employment discrimination claims, like most other claims, are subject to a statute of limitations. In other words, they must be filed within the time prescribed under the law, or a person risks waiving the right to recover damages. There are some exceptions that will allow a plaintiff to file a lawsuit outside of the strict time constraints, though, such as in cases involving continuing violations. Recently, a New York court discussed what behavior may constitute a continuing violation in an employment discrimination case, thereby allowing a plaintiff to pursue claims at a later date. If you were subject to discrimination in the workplace, you may be owed damages, and it is important to seek the counsel of a trusted New York employment discrimination attorney promptly to avoid losing the right to pursue compensation.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was employed as a correctional officer for the defendant city. He alleges that during his employment, he was targeted and singled out because of his race, and ultimately terminated. As such, he filed a lawsuit against the defendant city and several of its employees, asserting claims of discrimination based on race in violation of Title VII and the New York State and City Human Rights laws, as well as claims of a hostile work environment and wrongful termination. The defendants filed motions to dismiss, arguing in part that some of the plaintiff’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations. Plaintiff objected to the motions, arguing that the harm alleged constituted continuing violations.

Claims of Continuing Employment Discrimination

Plaintiff’s complaint alleged retaliation and discrimination in violation of Title VII. Pursuant to the existing law, such claims must be filed within three hundred days of the alleged unlawful behavior. An exception exists, however, for acts that constitute a continuing violation. In other words, for claims arising out of behavior that was part of a continued practice and policy of engaging in discriminatory behavior, which may be present in cases involving discriminatory mechanisms or specific practices.

Continue reading

People who work in New York are protected against discrimination in the workplace by numerous laws. As such, employees that are subject to unfair treatment based on their inclusion in a protected class may be able to recover damages from their employers. It is important to note, however, that the aggrieved party will typically only get one shot at proving liability, as demonstrated in a recent New York case in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s employment discrimination case based on a prior ruling against the plaintiff. If you were treated adversely at work due to your ethnicity, race, or any other protected class, it is critical to retain an assertive New York employment discrimination attorney to help you fight to protect your rights.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff worked for the defendant as a field worker. In June 2018, he had an argument with a co-worker and did not return to work for two days. When he eventually went back to the workplace, he was terminated by his supervisor. The plaintiff was a member of a union who intervened on behalf of the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff entered into a final chance stipulation wherein he agreed to attend an alcohol treatment program, during which his employment would be suspended for three months. After completion of the program, he could return to work. He failed to return to work, however, and he was terminated.

Allegedly, the plaintiff then filed a complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights (the Division), averring that the defendant violated the State Human Rights Law by discriminating against him based on his ethnicity and disabilities related to his alcoholism. The Division determined that the plaintiff’s employment ended because he failed to abide by the final chance stipulation and that the plaintiff failed to produce evidence of discrimination or show that the reason for his termination was pretextual. The plaintiff then filed similar claims in state court, alleging discrimination in violation of the New York City Human Rights Law (the NYCHRL). The defendant moved to dismiss the complaint based on the doctrine of election of remedies and collateral estoppel. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Continue reading

Numerous laws protect employees from discriminatory practices in the workplace; as such, an employee that is the victim of discrimination can report the unlawful practices in hopes of resolving the issue without legal intervention. In some instances, however, reporting illegal activity can worsen the situation and ultimately result in adverse employment actions against the victim, which may be grounds for a retaliation lawsuit. In a recent employment discrimination case, a New York court assessed what a plaintiff must plead to set forth a valid retaliation claim. If your employer treated you differently after you reported discrimination or harassment, you may be able to pursue claims against your employer and should speak to a dedicated New York employment discrimination attorney as soon as possible.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff worked as a firefighter for the defendant city. He alleges that throughout the duration of his employment, he was treated adversely due to his race, sexual orientation, and religion. He filed a complaint with the EEOC in the spring of 2015, after which he alleged the defendant struck back against him by placing him on light duty. He subsequently filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against the defendant, alleging numerous causes of action, including retaliation. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss, which the court granted.

Allegations Sufficient to Sustain a Retaliation Claim

Pursuant to the New York State Human Rights Law and Title VII, a plaintiff alleging retaliation must set forth plausible allegations that he or she participated in an activity that is protected under the law and that the defendant knew of the protected acts. The plaintiff must also show that he or she suffered an adverse employment action, such as termination or a reduction in pay or duties, and that the protected activity and the adverse action are causally related.

Continue reading

Contact Information