In Mejia v. City of New York, 2020 WL 2837008 (E.D.N.Y. May 30, 2020), the court, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim asserted against two individuals under the New York City Human Rights Law.
From the decision:
Plaintiff’s gender-based hostile work environment claim, however, is viable as against Opromalla and Wallace. On this record, a jury could find that Opromalla’s frequent alleged compliments of Plaintiff’s appearance and his offer of private lessons (which, as previously noted, could plausibly be interpreted as a sexual overture), coupled with Wallace’s statement to Plaintiff that people view her as “a bitch” were directly motivated by Plaintiff’s gender and therefore sufficient to make out a hostile work environment claim under NYCHRL. The City Defendants argue that this conduct amounts to no more than “petty slights and trivial inconveniences”; that may be true, but on this record the court cannot so conclude as a matter of law.