Opinion
14724, 150407/13
08-04-2015
Elizabeth Hasbrouck ANDERSON, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. EDMISTON & COMPANY, INC., Defendant–Appellant.
Greenfield Stein & Senior, LLP, New York (Paul T. Shoemaker of counsel), for appellant. Schwartz & Perry, LLP, New York (Brian Heller of counsel), for respondent.
Greenfield Stein & Senior, LLP, New York (Paul T. Shoemaker of counsel), for appellant.
Schwartz & Perry, LLP, New York (Brian Heller of counsel), for respondent.
FRIEDMAN, J.P., ACOSTA, MOSKOWITZ, RICHTER, KAPNICK, JJ.
Opinion Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered December 20, 2013, which denied defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendant is a New York corporation specializing in the sale, charter, management, and new construction of yachts around the world. Defendant employed plaintiff as a Charter Assistant from July 2008 until November 8, 2012, when allegedly she “was effectively terminated ... as a result of her complaint of gender discrimination.” According to the allegations in plaintiff's complaint, plaintiff's supervisor harbored a discriminatory animus against women and made numerous sexist and misogynist remarks, both directed at her and in her presence.
Plaintiff's allegations suffice to state claims of gender-based employment discrimination (see Serdans v. New York & Presbyt. Hosp., 112 A.D.3d 449, 450, 977 N.Y.S.2d 196 [1st Dept.2013] ; Askin v. Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 110 A.D.3d 621, 622, 973 N.Y.S.2d 629 [1st Dept.2013] ) and retaliation under the New York City Human Rights Law (see Fletcher v. Dakota, Inc., 99 A.D.3d 43, 51–52, 948 N.Y.S.2d 263 [1st Dept.2012] ; Albunio v. City of New York, 67 A.D.3d 407, 889 N.Y.S.2d 4 [1st Dept.2009], affd. 16 N.Y.3d 472, 922 N.Y.S.2d 244, 947 N.E.2d 135 [2011] ). In particular, according her the benefit of every possible favorable inference (see 511 W. 232nd Owners Corp. v. Jennifer Realty Co., 98 N.Y.2d 144, 151–152, 746 N.Y.S.2d 131, 773 N.E.2d 496 [2002] ; Askin, 110 A.D.3d at 622, 973 N.Y.S.2d 629 ), plaintiff has adequately alleged that she was terminated, for purposes of stating the foregoing claims.
Plaintiff has also adequately alleged a claim for hostile work environment by alleging that her supervisor routinely made deprecatory, vulgar, and offensive remarks about women, including that they were useful only for administrative services and sex (see Salemi v. Gloria's Tribeca, Inc., 115 A.D.3d 569, 569–570, 982 N.Y.S.2d 458 [1st Dept.2014] ; Gaffney v. City of New York, 101 A.D.3d 410, 410, 955 N.Y.S.2d 318 [1st Dept.2012], lv. denied 21 N.Y.3d 858, 2013 WL 3185298 [2013] ).