ESPAILLAT v. BRELI ORIGINALS, INC.
227 A.D.2d 266 (1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 875
Marisol Espaillat, Appellant, v. Breli Originals, Inc., et al., Respondents
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
May 21, 1996
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.
A "hostile work environment" exists, for purposes of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC § 2000e-2 [a] ), when the workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive as to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment (Harris v Forklift Sys.,
Plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts that, if true, could render the corporate defendant liable under a "hostile work environment" theory. Plaintiff alleges in her second action that her shipping department supervisor, over a period of many months, repeatedly made offensive sexual remarks to her, inquired about her sexual preferences and touched her without permission, some of which behavior took place in the presence of other Breli employees and officers. Plaintiff alleged that the supervisor had used his authority over her to direct her attendance at a (nonexistent) computer training program in Boston, where he allegedly raped her and paid for the trip with a business credit card. Plaintiff also maintained that Breli's president tolerated such misbehavior by impliedly warning plaintiff that her job was at stake if she refused to be "more understanding" of her supervisor.
These allegations also support the submission of claims under the New York State Human Rights Law, which makes it
The allegations also support the submission of claims under Administrative Code of the City of New York § 8-107 (13) (b) (2), which provides that "[a]n employer shall be liable for an unlawful discriminatory practice based upon the conduct of an employee * * * where * * * the employer knew of the employee's * * * discriminatory conduct, and acquiesced in such conduct or failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action".
Plaintiff is also entitled to replead her cause of action for constructive discharge, to allege that her employer deliberately made her working conditions so intolerable as to force her resignation (Martin v Citibank,
Finally, plaintiff has not adequately alleged that a persistently "racially hostile environment" existed, separate and apart from the gender bias claims.
- No Cases Found