Race/Color Discrimination

In a recent decision, Comcast Corporation v. National Association of African American-Owned Media, 2020 WL 1325816 (U.S. March 23, 2020) (Gorsuch, J.), the U.S. Supreme Court held that 42 U.S.C. § 1981 – a federal statute that prohibits race discrimination in the making and enforcement of contracts – is subject to the “ordinary” tort rule…

Read More SCOTUS: Race Discrimination Statute (42 U.S.C. § 1981) Requires Showing of “But For” Causation

In Montgomery v. New York City Transit Authority, 2020 WL 1313184 (2d Cir. March 18, 2020) (Summary Order), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State and City Human Rights Laws.…

Read More 2d Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Discrimination Claims Against the NYC Transit Authority; Rejects “Coded Language” Theory

In Triana v. NYC Health & Hospitals, No. 152276/2019, 2020 NY Slip Op 30605(U), 2020 WL 1031379 (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Feb. 20, 2020), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s race-based hostile work environment claims asserted under 42 USC §§ 1981 and 1983 and the New York City Human Rights Law. The court…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Claim Dismissed; Accent Comments Held Insufficient

In Cunningham v. New York Junior Tennis League, Inc., 18-CV-1743, 2020 WL 916964 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 26, 2020), the court, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s race-based hostile work environment claims. After summarizing the legal standards for hostile work environment claims under federal, state, and city law, the court applied the law…

Read More Race-Based Hostile Work Environment Claim Dismissed; “Relate to the Neighborhood” Comment Deemed Insufficient

In Ramirez v. NYP Holdings, Inc., 18-cv-12058, 2020 WL 470011 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2020), the court held, inter alia, that plaintiff failed to state claims for race and national origin discrimination. (The court did find, however, that plaintiff sufficiently alleged a hostile work environment claim.) The court noted, in particular, that “although [plaintiff’s complaint] does…

Read More Notwithstanding “Deplorable” Racially-Disparaging Remarks, Court Dismisses Race and National Origin Discrimination Claims

In Ramirez v. NYP Holdings, Inc., 18-cv-12058, 2020 WL 470011 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2020), the court held, inter alia, that plaintiff sufficiently alleged a hostile work environment claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. From the decision: Plaintiff has alleged that, throughout his time working at the Printing Center he was…

Read More Hostile Work Environment Claim Sufficiently Alleged by Hispanic Plaintiff

In recent news, it has been reported that a bank called the police on a black Michigan man because it suspected fraud, upon his attempt to deposit checks – resulting from the settlement of a racial discrimination lawsuit. He is now suing the bank for engaging in race discrimination in a place of public accommodation.

Read More Ironic Lawsuit Against Bank

In Boyce-Herbert v. New York and Presbyterian Hospital, 2020 WL 376788 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 23, 2020), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims.[1]Initially, the court held that plaintiff’s discrimination claims were time-barred, but addressed the merits of plaintiff’s claims in an “abundance of caution.” The court listed the elements that a plaintiff must demonstrate in…

Read More Age/Race/Gender/Religious Discrimination Claims Dismissed Against NY and Presbyterian Hospital

In some cases, displays of racially- and/or sexually-charged content (e.g., videos) at work might be evidence of actionable employment discrimination. That is, of course, not an ironclad rule. Consider, for example, the recent case of Johnson v. IAC/InterActiveCorp, 2020 NY Slip Op 00488 (NY App. Div. 1st Dept. Jan. 23, 2020), in which the New York Appellate…

Read More “Offensive” Content Shown at Work Insufficient to Demonstrate Disparate Treatment, Court Holds