Judge Arthur Spatt
Agosta, who has a real or perceived mental disability, is a custodian with the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. His Oct. 5, 2012, lawsuit asserting a hostile work environment alleged that the individual defendants engaged in sexual harassment, vandalized his property and brought him up on misconduct and insubordination charges in retaliation for his complaints. The EEOC issued a right-to-sue letter in July 2012. Agosta’s Oct. 5, 2012, lawsuit alleged the County Defendants violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by treating him differently than similarly situated individuals lacking disabilities, and by retaliating against him for opposing discriminatory acts grounded on his disability. District court dismissed Agosta’s ADA claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Instructed by Cavallaro v. Corning Inc. and Young v. Lord & Taylor, it determined that Agosta’s August 2011 EEOC charge claimed discrimination based on sex and sexual orientation, but not a mental disability. Thus Agosta’s claim that he was discriminated against due to his mental disability or perceived mental disability was not reasonably related to the factual allegations in his EEOC charge, and must be dismissed as procedurally barred.
