Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 01, 2011

Swift v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.

Plaintiff, a homosexual male and former employee of Countrywide Home Loans, filed a lawsuit alleging discrimination based on Title VII and New York State Human Rights Law, claiming a hostile work environment due to "gender stereotyping" and retaliatory termination. Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing Title VII does not cover sexual orientation discrimination and that the harassment wasn't severe enough. The court granted summary judgment for the hostile environment claim, concluding that the plaintiff was attempting to "bootstrap" a sexual orientation discrimination claim into a gender stereotyping claim, which is not cognizable under Title VII. However, the court denied summary judgment for the retaliation claim, finding that the plaintiff's good faith belief in protected activity and questions of fact regarding causation and pretext were sufficient to withstand summary judgment.

DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentGender StereotypingSexual OrientationTitle VIISummary JudgmentEmployment LawNew York State Human Rights LawFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56

References

Case No. ADJ10084731, ADJ10084732

Regular

Nov 27, 2017

TIMOTHY BEECHAM vs. SWIFT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, LLC

This case involved the striking of a Qualified Medical Evaluator's (PQME) report due to concerns of racial or ethnic bias. The WCJ found the PQME's deposition testimony, where she referred to the applicant's "Negro blood" and linked it to her assessment of his muscle tone and strength, indicated bias. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed this decision, agreeing that such statements suggested reliance on stereotypes and improper medical conclusions. Consequently, the PQME's report was deemed not substantial evidence and was struck, with a new medical evaluation ordered.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorRacial BiasEthnic BiasSubstantial EvidenceStriking ReportNew PanelNeurologyIndustrial Injury

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

People v. Duncan

This opinion addresses an appeal by an unnamed defendant convicted of manslaughter and criminal possession of a weapon, challenging the prosecutor's exercise of peremptory challenges to exclude two Black prospective jurors under Batson v. Kentucky. The court examines whether the prosecutor's explanations for these exclusions were race-neutral and non-pretextual. While the trial court's finding regarding the exclusion of the first juror (due to tardiness and perceived 'feisty' demeanor) is affirmed, the appellate court determines that the prosecutor's explanation for excluding the second Black woman, based on a stereotype of her employment as a monitor technician, was insufficient and not related to the specific case, thereby failing to rebut the inference of purposeful racial discrimination. The opinion also discusses the preservation of the Batson issue for appellate review and finds no merit in other contentions regarding justification instruction or repugnant verdict.

Batson challengeperemptory challengesracial discriminationjury selectionequal protectioncriminal procedureappellate reviewpreservation of errormanslaughter convictioncriminal possession of a weapon

References

Case No. Dkt. #'#1

Regular Panel Decision

Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc.

Plaintiff Matthew Christiansen, an openly gay and HIV-positive man, sued his employer DDB Worldwide Communications Group Inc., its parent Omnicom Group, Inc., his supervisor Joe Cianciotto, and DDB executives Peter Hempel and Chris Brown. He alleged sexual stereotyping, disability discrimination, and retaliation under federal, state, and local laws, as well as state-law claims including aiding and abetting discrimination, slander, intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, and labor law violations. Defendants moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint. The Court granted the motions in full, finding that Plaintiff failed to state a claim for disability discrimination or retaliation under federal law, and his Title VII discrimination claims based on sexual orientation were not cognizable under current Second Circuit precedent. The Court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state and local claims.

Sexual Orientation DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentSexual StereotypingTitle VIIADANYSHRLNYCHRLEmployment Law

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Incantalupo v. Lawrence Union Free School District No. 15

The case concerns a motion for attorneys' fees and costs filed by Defendants against Plaintiffs and their former counsel, Robert M. Agostisi, following the dismissal of a lawsuit as frivolous. Plaintiffs had alleged that the Lawrence Union Free School District's "Consolidation Plan" to close a school and cut taxes violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments by favoring Orthodox Judaism. The Court, Seybert, District Judge, previously dismissed the initial complaint as frivolous, a decision upheld on appeal. In this memorandum and decision, the Court granted the motion for fees and costs in part, finding the Plaintiffs' complaint "completely without merit" and Mr. Agostisi's conduct demonstrated bad faith due to misrepresentation of facts and the inclusion of unnecessary, stereotypical, and offensive allegations. The Court awarded the Defendants $5,000 in attorneys' fees, to be equally assessed against the Plaintiffs and Mr. Agostisi, rejecting the Defendants' request for $120,000 as unreasonable.

Attorneys FeesFrivolous LitigationSanctionsFirst AmendmentEstablishment ClauseEqual ProtectionReligious DiscriminationSchool BoardTax CutsPublic Education

References

Showing 1-5 of 5 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Swift v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.

DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentGender StereotypingSexual OrientationTitle VIISummary JudgmentEmployment LawNew York State Human Rights LawFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56

TIMOTHY BEECHAM vs. SWIFT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, LLC

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorRacial BiasEthnic BiasSubstantial EvidenceStriking ReportNew PanelNeurologyIndustrial Injury

People v. Duncan

Batson challengeperemptory challengesracial discriminationjury selectionequal protectioncriminal procedureappellate reviewpreservation of errormanslaughter convictioncriminal possession of a weapon

Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc.

Sexual Orientation DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentSexual StereotypingTitle VIIADANYSHRLNYCHRLEmployment Law

Incantalupo v. Lawrence Union Free School District No. 15

Attorneys FeesFrivolous LitigationSanctionsFirst AmendmentEstablishment ClauseEqual ProtectionReligious DiscriminationSchool BoardTax CutsPublic Education