Blog Post
Zakrzewska v. The New School, No. 09-0611 (2d Cir. July 27, 2009)
Posted by: Paul Mollica
July 27, 2009
Topic: Daily Developments in EEO Law
The district court certified the following question to the Second Circuit: "does the affirmative defense to employer liability articulated in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998), and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998), apply to sexual harassment and retaliation claims under section 8-107 of the New York City Administrative Code?" The Second Circuit now kicks the can to the New York Court of Appeals.
Zakrzewska v. The New School, No. 09-0611 (2d Cir. July 27, 2009) : It is a steady theme of the past decade or more of civil rights litigation -- look to states and localities to deliver more liberal rights and remedies than under federal law. So while Title VII plaintiffs must fend off the Faragher/Ellerth defense in supervisory sex harassment case, other jurisdictions may decline to recognize this defense altogether. Under the New York City Administrative Code, with an expansive sex discrimination law that is enforceable by a private right of action, courts have been unable to decide whether the defense ought to apply.
Now the Second Circuit gives the State of New York's highest court a chance to resolve this issue. Holds the panel: "[W]e conclude that the question whether the Faragher-Ellerth defense applies to section 8-107, subdivision 13(b) of the New York City Administrative Code is appropriate or certification. First, this question has not yet been addressed by the New York Court of Appeals. [fn. omitted] Second, this is a question of considerable significance. As the District Court noted, employment iscrimination cases are a substantial portion of the caseload for the District Courts of this Circuit. See Zakrzewska, 598 F. Supp. 2d at 437. Because plaintiffs often assert claims under state and city antidiscrimination laws, a resolution of the vicarious liability standards and defenses applicable under those statutes is needed. Although a decision from our Court is binding only within in the federal courts of our Circuit, our interpretation of the New York City Administrative Code would undoubtedly have some impact on employment discrimination claims pending in the state courts as well. We therefore proceed with caution and deference to the New York Court of Appeals. Third and finally, the answer to this question is necessary to the resolution of this lawsuit. See Zakrzewska, 598 F. Supp. 2d at 437 ('[T]his is a controlling question of law, the resolution of which would materially advance the ultimate termination of this litigation, as application of Faragher-Ellerth here would result in dismissal of the action against TNS.')."
Topics
Daily Developments in EEO Law
EEO Case Summaries by Circuit
Old "Daily Developments" Blog Archive
Recent Updates
September 08, 2010
Payne v. Salazar, No. 09-5291 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 7, 2010)
September 06, 2010
EEOC v. Prospect Airport Services, No. 07-17221 (9th Cir. Sept. 3, 2010)
August 31, 2010
Hatmaker v. Memorial Medical Center, No. 09-3002 (7th Cir. Aug. 30, 2010)
August 27, 2010
EEOC v. UPS Supply Chain Solutions, No. 08-56874 (9th Cir. Aug. 27, 2010); Lewallen v. City of Beaumont, No. 09-40826 (5th Cir. Aug. 23, 2010)
Archives
September, 2010
August, 2010
July, 2010
June, 2010
May, 2010
April, 2010
March, 2010
February, 2010
January, 2010
December, 2009
November, 2009
October, 2009
September, 2009
December, 2008
November, 2008
October, 2008
September, 2008
August, 2008
July, 2008
June, 2008
May, 2008
April, 2008
March, 2008
June, 2009
May, 2009
April, 2009
March, 2009
February, 2009
January, 2009
July, 2009
August, 2009
Web Resources
Other Employment Sites Worth a Spin (updated 12/19/08)
Jottings by an Employment Lawyer
Employment Law Information Network
Regional
California Labor & Employment Law Blog
Storm's California Employment Law
Connecticut Employment Law Blog
New York Employment Lawyer Blog
[Virginia] The Laconic Law Blog
Legal-Related, Not Specifically Employment, But Good Reading



