CompFox AI Summary
Kisshia Simmons-Grant sued her former employer, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, for race discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and New York State/City Human Rights Laws. She alleged she received less lucrative work as an African American contract attorney and experienced retaliation after complaining about favoritism and a hostile work environment. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff failed to show an adverse employment action for discrimination or constructive discharge for retaliation. The court found no evidence of an adverse employment action attributable to race-based disparate treatment and that the plaintiff's fear of a co-worker was not objectively reasonable for a constructive discharge claim. Consequently, the court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, dismissing all federal claims and declining supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.
Simmons-Grant v. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP is a workers' compensation case decided in District Court, S.D. New York. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in District Court, S.D. New York.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Kisshia Simmons-Grant sued her former employer, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, for race discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and New York State/City Human Rights Laws. She alleged she received less lucrative work as an African American contract attorney and experienced retaliation after complaining about favoritism and a hostile work environment. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff failed to show an adverse employment action for discrimination or constructive discharge for retaliation. The court found no evidence of an adverse employment action attributable to race-based disparate treatment and that the plaintiff's fear of a co-worker was not objectively reasonable for a constructive discharge claim. Consequently, the court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, dismissing all federal claims and declining supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.