Sexual Harassment

In Hernandez v. Premium Merchant Funding One, LLC et al, 2020 WL 3962108 (S.D.N.Y. July 13, 2020), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s hostile work environment sexual harassment claim asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. While the court found that certain “despicable if true” actions were “isolated” and…

Read More Sexual Harassment (Hostile Work Environment) Claim Survives Dismissal; Alleged Touching/Grabbing Was “Severe”

In Tirschwell v. TCW Group Inc., No. 150777/2018, 2020 WL 3104364, 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 31816(U) (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County June 11, 2020), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s gender discrimination / sexual harassment claim under the New York City Human Rights Law. From the decision: [P]laintiff testified about…

Read More Sexual Harassment Claim May Proceed to Jury; Alleged Harasser’s Denial of Sexual Conduct Presented Fact Issue

A recently-issued Consent Decree in the matter of EEOC v. GRK Pas LLC d/b/a GRK Fresh Greek, 2020 WL 3073786 (S.D.N.Y. June 10, 2020) reflects the resolution of plaintiffs’ hostile work environment sexual harassment claims asserted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. From the Decree: Considering Defendants’ ongoing financial difficulties. the COVID-19 pandemic.…

Read More EEOC Consent Decree Reached with GRK Fresh Holdings in Sexual Harassment Case

In Erno v. New York State Office of Information Technology Services, 19-CV-1457, 2020 WL 2736563 (N.D.N.Y. May 26, 2020), the court, inter alia, denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s hostile work environment sexual harassment claim. From the decision: Considered in totality, the Court finds that the facts alleged by Plaintiff are sufficient to state a hostile work environment…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment Claim Sufficiently Alleged; Allegations Included Sexist Jokes

In Matter of Oz Trucking and Rigging Corp., No. 2018-09771, 2486/17, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 09009, 2019 WL 6884935 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept., Dec. 18, 2019), the court confirmed a New York State Division of Human Rights determination that the complainant suffered sexual harassment/hostile work environment, as well as the award of $7,500 for mental anguish and…

Read More Sexual Harassment Determination Upheld

In a recent letter dated July 30, 2019, several New York lawmakers criticize Ernst & Young’s apparent intention to require sexual harassment claimant Karen Ward to pursue her claims in arbitration as opposed to in court. This letter highlights and underscores the evils of forced arbitration, particularly in the sexual harassment context. From the letter: ……

Read More NY Lawmakers Underscore Unfairness of Forced Arbitration in Letter to Ernst & Young

Sexual harassment cases, no doubt, involve sensitive subject matter. It is not surprising, then, that a plaintiff asserting such claims in court wishes to proceed anonymously. A recent decision illustrates the principles governing when and under what circumstances this may be done. The case is Doe v. Gong Xi Fa Cai, Inc. d/b/a Alta Restaurant,…

Read More Sexual Harassment Plaintiff May Not Proceed Anonymously, Court Concludes Upon Application of 10-Factor Test

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 would…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment Claim Against Mt. Sinai St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Survives Summary Judgment

In Nokaj v. North East Dental Management, LLC et al, 16-cv-3035, 2019 WL 634656 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2019), the court (inter alia) denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim of “aiding and abetting” discrimination (sexual harassment) under the New York State Human Rights Law. The court holds that plaintiff may maintain an “aiding…

Read More Aiding & Abetting Sexual Harassment Claim, Based on Supervisor Inaction, Survives Summary Judgment

Sexual harassment is not limited to scenarios where both the perpetrator and the victim are both employed by the same entity. In some cases, the harasser can be a non-employee – such as a customer. Whether the employee/victim’s employer may be held liable depends on the circumstances. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations…

Read More Sexual Harassment by Customers, Clients, and Patrons