In Elias v. City oof New York et al, 19-CV-11411, 2021 WL 411435 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2021), the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s hostile work environment claims (on timeliness grounds).
From the decision:
Conspicuously, Defendants do not move to dismiss on the ground that she fails to state HWE claims as a substantive matter. Instead, Defendants move to dismiss her HWE claims solely on timeliness grounds. Whether Defendants move to dismiss the claims in their entirety or only in part (in the case of her Title VII HWE claim, to the extent that it is based on acts that occurred before September 21, 2017, and in the case of her state-law HWE claims, to the extent that they are based on acts that occurred before December 12, 2016) is not entirely clear. Either way, however, the motion is denied, as Elias alleges that some of the conduct underlying her HWE claims occurred within the relevant limitations periods and whether she can invoke the continuing violation doctrine is not a question that the Court can resolve at this stage of the litigation, when the facts alleged in the Complaint must be taken as true and all reasonable inferences drawn in Elias’s favor. [Citations omitted.)