Failure-to-Hire Gender Discrimination Claim Dismissed Against Morgan Stanley

In Scalercio-Isenberg v. Morgan Stanley Services Group Inc., 2019 WL 6916099 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 19, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s failure-to-hire gender discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

From the decision:

[Plaintiff] has failed to make out a prima facie case that she suffered age or gender discrimination when Morgan Stanley declined to hire her. To establish a prima facie claim of gender or age discrimination for failure to hire, a plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) she is a member of a protected class, (2) she was qualified for the job for which she applied, (3) she was denied the job; and (4) the denial occurred under circumstances that give rise to an inference of invidious discrimination. …

[Plaintiff] does not demonstrate that Morgan Stanley’s failure to hire her occurred under circumstances that give rise to an inference of gender discrimination. Scalercio-Isenberg has alleged no facts that suggest that Morgan Stanley’s decision not to hire her was based on her gender. The fact that she showed that she was “very interested” in employment with Morgan Stanley when she submitted approximately 25 job applications (see Compl. at 7), does not entitle her to a job interview. Further, the speed with which her latest application was rejected (see Compl. at 8–9) does not suggest anything other than perhaps a familiarity with her application after a litany of job applications. Even the fact that she may have volunteered that she was a woman on her application (see Dkt. No. 10-2 at 6) does not move the needle in her favor. Scalercio-Isenberg is missing the connective tissue that links her protected status to the alleged failure to hire. She offers no allegations, save for her own speculation and that of other uninvolved persons, that Morgan Stanley used that information in its hiring decisions — much less that it was a motivating factor in their decision making. Accordingly, Scalercio-Isenberg fails to make out even a prima facie case for gender discrimination under Title VII or the NYSHRL.