Stray Remarks

In Johnson v. City of New York, 2020 WL 2036708 (S.D.N.Y. April 28, 2020), the court, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s race discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. On the race discrimination claim,…

Read More Firefighter’s Race Discrimination Claims Dismissed; Comments Were “Stray Remarks”

In Anderson v. New York City Department of Finance, 19-CV-7971, 2020 WL 1922624 (S.D.N.Y. April 21, 2020), the court, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s race-based discrimination and hostile work environment claims. As to his hostile work environment claim, the court explained, with respect to the nature and consistency of the alleged conduct:…

Read More Race-Based Hostile Work Environment Claim Dismissed Against NYC Department of Finance

In Eyuboglu v. Gravity Media, LLC, 2020 WL 1280675 (2d Cir. March 17, 2020) (Summary Order), the court affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court based its decision, in part, on the so-called “stray marks” doctrine: “While discriminatory remarks may constitute evidence of…

Read More Citing “Stray Remarks” Doctrine, 2d Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Employment Discrimination Claims

In Bonilla v. City of New York et al, 18-cv-12142, 2019 WL 6050757 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 15, 2019), the court, inter alia, held that plaintiff sufficiently alleged race discrimination. Central to plaintiff’s claim was his being called “bobo” – which means “fool” in Spanish – several times. In reaching its conclusion, the court cited and applied…

Read More Race Discrimination Claim Stated; “Bobo” Slur Cited

In Downey and Bonner v. Adloox, Inc., 18‐3521‐cv (2d Cir. Oct. 24, 2019) (Summary Order), the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of plaintiffs’ age discrimination claims. This case aptly illustrates how the “stray remarks” doctrine operates in the age discrimination context. In sum, the court found that – notwithstanding two arguably age-related comments – plaintiffs…

Read More Age Discrimination Dismissal Affirmed; Termination Was Due to Poor Performance; “Old Timer” and “Young Sharks” Comments Were “Stray Remarks”

In Tsismentzoglou v. Milos Estiatorio Inc., 18-cv-9664, 2019 WL 2287902 (SDNY May 29, 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s employment discrimination claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). From the decision: Plaintiff has not shown circumstances giving rise to even a minimal inference of discrimination, however, Tsismentzoglou does not provide…

Read More Age Discrimination Claim Dismissed; Court Finds “Young Man’s Game” Comment To Be a “Stray Remark”

In Emengo v. Stark, 2019 WL 2206250 (2d Cir. May 22, 2019) (Summary Order), the court, inter alia, affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s failure-to-promote race/national origin discrimination claim. After summarizing the law, the court explained: While Defendants sufficiently established non-discriminatory reasons for the failure to promote Emengo, he has failed to present sufficient evidence that…

Read More Citing “Stray Remarks” Doctrine, 2d Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Discrimination Claim

From Lawtone-Bowles v. City of New York, 2019 WL 652593 (S.D.N.Y. 2019): [Plaintiff] alleges little more than a few stray remarks. “Big Daddy” and “cabbage patch baby” bear no facial connection to any protected characteristic. Rubin v. Abbott Labs., 2015 WL 5679644, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 23, 2015). A single excited utterance of the pejorative…

Read More “Big Daddy” and Other Remarks Were Insufficient to Plausibly Allege a Hostile Work Environment