In Hausdorf v. New York City Department of Education, 2018 WL 895657 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2018), the court adopted a Report & Recommendation as to plaintiff’s age discrimination and retaliation claims.((The court also upheld the dismissal of plaintiff’s hostile work environment claims (as insufficiently “hostile”) other claims under the NYCHRL’s election-of-remedies doctrine and failure to comply with Education Law section 3813(1)’s notice requirement.)
From the decision:
Mr. Hausdorf’s ADEA discrimination and retaliation claims, however, are adequately pled to survive a motion to dismiss. The Court accordingly denies the DOE’s motion to dismiss those claims. As the Report describes, Mr. Hausdorf has alleged several adverse employment actions. Although some alleged actions were “mere inconveniences,” Report at 12, the cancellation of Mr. Hausdorf’s Saturday games and the denial of his practice time—causing him to lose additional wages he would have otherwise earned—were, as alleged, material, id. at 13. Allegations of an unsatisfactory June 30, 2016, evaluation rating and a decision not to rehire Mr. Hausdorf for the 2016-17 school year are also sufficiently material. Id. And as the Report lucidly explains, Mr. Hausdorf has plausibly alleged that his age was a but-for cause of these actions. See id. at 13-16. Mr. Hausdorf’s retaliation claim is also plausibly pled. As the Report explains, Mr. Hausdorf plausibly alleged retaliation based on his May 2016 complaint to the SDHR. Id. at 19. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Report, the Court denies the DOE’s motion to dismiss Mr. Hausdorf’s discrimination and retaliation claims.