The Second Circuit recently held, in Irizarry v. Catsimatidis, that John Catsimatidis – the chairman, president, and CEO of defendant Gristede’s Foods, Inc. (and, of course, New York City mayoral candidate) – was an “employer” within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and was hence individually liable for damages in a lawsuit…Read More John Catsimatidis Held Individually Liable For FLSA Wage Violations
Traffic lights are everywhere, and drivers typically take it for granted that they will work properly. But, like everything, there are no absolutes. Furthermore, like any man-made object, they are subject to malfunctioning (see, for example, the below video, taken by me at the corner of Broadway and Murray). What then? Turns out that there’s…Read More New York City Traffic Tidbit: Malfunctioning Traffic Signals
Below is the complaint recently filed by an employee of Capital One Bank for sexual harassment under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. Plaintiff claims that she was subjected to a sexually hostile work environment, that the company failed to take steps to stop it, and that she was fired for complaining about…Read More Bankers (Allegedly) Behaving Badly
A recent decision from the Southern District, Wiltshire v. Williams, reiterates that acquittal of criminal charges is not inconsistent with a finding of probable cause to arrest (which, if shown, is a complete defense to a false arrest claim): In the instant case, Plaintiff has contended that the dismissal of his criminal case precludes a finding…Read More Probable Cause to Arrest May Be Found, Even After Acquittal
A gender discrimination claim may lie where, for example, an employer takes an adverse action against an employee based on preconceived notions about women’s roles (so-called “gender stereotyping”). In the Eastern District’s recent decision in Apicella v. Rite Aid, the plaintiff was a pharmacist who claimed that defendant engaged in gender discrimination under Title VII, the Equal…Read More Adverse Action Based on “Gender Stereotyping” Supports Discrimination Claim
A story that has been making the rounds is of a 1962 NASA rejection letter to a hopeful female astronaut. It thanks the author for her “offer to go on a space mission” but advises her that “we have no existing program concerning women astronauts nor do we contemplate any such plan.” Maybe they couldn’t…Read More NASA: No Girls Allowed
Here’s a tip: when appearing at a hearing to seek reinstatement of your gun permit, be sure to leave the angry at home. In other words, don’t be this guy. That was the lesson learned the hard way by the petitioner in Matter of Hahn v. Williams, 2013 NY Slip Op 04864 (decided June 27,…Read More When Do We Get The Freakin’ GUNS?
The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department recently held, in Hutchings v. Yuter, 2013 NY Slip Op 04988 (July 2, 2013), that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was appropriately invoked. There, plaintiff alleged that “a garage door suddenly fell and struck him on the head”, causing injury. “Res ipsa loquitur” is Latin for “the thing itself…Read More Res Ipsa Loquitur Does Not Require “Sole Physical Access” to the Injury-Causing Instrumentality
In Najjar v. Mirecki, 11-cv-5138 (SDNY July 2, 2013), the Southern District of New York held that a pro se plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to various claims of discrimination. This case illustrates the difference between the heightened “but for” and lessened “mixed motive” causation standards, as well as the differences between the…Read More Age/Disability Discrimination Case Illustrates Difference Between “But For” and “Mixed Motive” Causation Standards
Most people are (or at least think they are) familiar with the amendments comprising the Bill of Rights, namely those involving (obviously paraphrasing and simplifying here) “free speech” (First), gun issues (Second), illegal searches and seizures (Fourth), the “right to remain silent” (Fifth), the right to counsel (Sixth), the right to a jury trial (Seventh),…Read More There’s a THIRD Amendment Now?