Pugliese v. Actin Biomed LLC

2 Citing cases

  1. Huntley v. City of New York

    2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 32084 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2024)

    Plaintiff states that she has been forced to work in an environment which labeled females as lesser than male counterparts directly by the Commanding Officer. She alleges that she was ostracized and humiliated which is sufficient to allege constructive discharge at the pleading stage (see Pugliese v. Actin Biomed LLC, 106 A.D.3d 591 [1st Dept 2013]). Plaintiff's constructive discharge is further evidenced in her pleadings by her alleged denial of positions which would have advanced her career, denial of overtime and other benefits of employment which cost Plaintiff as much as $7,500 per month compared to her male peers, denied transfer requests, and retirement before she would have otherwise.

  2. Higgins v. Gladstone Gallery LLC

    2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 30436 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023)

    Defendants' reply reiterates that plaintiff has not asserted a claim based on her purported constructive discharge, and therefore her NYSHRL retaliation claim fails. They compare her allegations to those alleged in Pugliese v Actin Biomed LLC (106 A.D.3d 591 [1st Dept 2013]). In Pugliese, the First Department found that the complaint stated a cause of action for constructive discharge and retaliation by alleging that the defendants "humiliated, ostracized, and sexually harassed plaintiff, and told her that they would make her life miserable until she quit, in response to her objections to the violations of the regulations by defendants" (id. at 592 [internal quotation marks omitted]).