From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anderson v. Abodeen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 18, 2006
29 A.D.3d 431 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

8558.

May 18, 2006.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karen S. Smith, J.), entered July 8, 2005, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's causes of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and sexual harassment based on hostile work environment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Lynis M. Anderson, appellant pro se.

Shafer Glazer, LLP, New York (Howard S. Shafer of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Tom, J.P., Saxe, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ., concur.


Plaintiff's allegation that the supervisor at his regular job as a security guard maliciously displayed to his coworkers nude photos that he had taken of himself in connection with his sideline as a model does not show conduct sufficiently outrageous to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress ( see Howell v. New York Post Co., 81 NY2d 115, 122). While the supervisor's display of the photos allegedly for no reason other than to ridicule and harass was certainly offensive, there is no evidence, indeed no claim, that such display was motivated by an animus against men such as might support a claim of sexual harassment ( see Brennan v. Metropolitan Opera Assn., 284 AD2d 66, 74).


Summaries of

Anderson v. Abodeen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 18, 2006
29 A.D.3d 431 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Anderson v. Abodeen

Case Details

Full title:LYNIS M. ANDERSON, Appellant, v. SHIMELLA "STAR" ABODEEN, Defendant, and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 18, 2006

Citations

29 A.D.3d 431 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3987
816 N.Y.S.2d 415

Citing Cases

Toos v. Leggiadro Int'l, Inc.

Defendants argue, citing to the case law below, that the suggestive picture is not actionable, as it is an…

Stern v. Burkle

Establishing the requisite outrageousness has indeed proven difficult. For example, outrageousness was not…