In Cadet-Legros v. New York University Hospital Center, 2014 WL 11087457 (Sup. Ct. NY Cty . Oct. 9, 2014), the court denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s race discrimination claim under the New York City Human Rights Law.
This decision illustrates how even allegedly “race neutral” language can be evidence of an improper motivation.
From the opinion:
[P]laintiff points to emails to show that her supervisors used coded racial language when referring to her in their conversations. In particular, they said she had ‘tirades,’ and … that the ‘leopard does not change its spots.’ Plaintiff argues that such facially neutral terms can still be evidence of racial harassment in the proper context. … [D]efendant notes that plaintiff’s [deposition] testimony indicates that she was never the subject of any racial slurs, and that no one ever made any racially offensive jokes or comments in her presence. Defendant misses the point.
To begin, the issue is the supervisors’ motivation for the employment actions taken against plaintiff. Such utterances may be evidence of their motive. Defendant argues, however, tht the noted words do not demonstrate racial animus and that the phrase a ‘leopard does not change its spots’ is a well known colloquialism with no racial implications. Defendant’s argument is unavailing. While such words may have no racial undertones, defendant fails to appreciate the need to consider the context and circumstances in which the phrase is uttered. Indeed, in certain contexts and circumstances, such utterances may be deemed to betray an individual’s intentions. Under these circumstances, resolution of this issue is for the trier of fact.
Accordingly, a factual issue exists as to whether her termination was racially based. (Emphasis added.)
Although the court denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff’s claim for racial discrimination as to her termination, it dismissed her claims alleging race discrimination as to a pay disparity, hostile work environment, and retaliation.
//
Note: The Appellate Division, 1st Dept., modified the court’s Order to grant the motion for summary judgment and dismiss the complaint. Cadet-Legros v. New York University Hosp. Center, 135 A.D.3d 196, 21 N.Y.S.3d 221 (App. Div. 1 Dept. Dec. 8, 2015).