ROBERT A. COLE, plf-res, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY, def-ap

13064. ROBERT A. COLE, plf-res, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY, def-ap — Jackson Lewis P.C., White Plains (Joseph A. Saccomanao, Jr. of counsel), for ap — Dupe & Monroe, P.C., Goshen (James E. Monroe of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered July 3, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action for discrimination (hostile work environment) and retaliation under the New York State Human Rights Law, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

13064. ROBERT A. COLE, plf-res, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY, def-ap — Jackson Lewis P.C., White Plains (Joseph A. Saccomanao, Jr. of counsel), for ap — Dupe & Monroe, P.C., Goshen (James E. Monroe of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered July 3, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action for discrimination (hostile work environment) and retaliation under the New York State Human Rights Law, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff (see Branham v. Loews Orpheum Cinemas, Inc., 8 NY3d 931 [2007]), the evidence shows that, from the very inception of his employment with defendant as an auto center manager, plaintiff was subjected to a constant bombardment of anti-gay remarks and other communications, which included insulting and offensive remarks about other Sears employees who were thought to be gay; crude anti-gay humor and graphic sexual images disseminated by text and email; and anti-gay hate speech made repeatedly and openly by an operations manager in the presence of plaintiff and others. The anti-gay harassment worsened after plaintiff made his first formal complaint about it in March 2007. Among other things, the operations manager was promoted to acting general manager and continued to make offensive antigay remarks, and plaintiff received multiple offensive emails from an email address created for the apparent purpose of harassing him, which he testified were sent by a manager in another Sears store. Given this evidence, issues of fact exist whether plaintiff was subjected to harassment sufficiently severe and pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of his employment (see Forrest v. Jewish Guild for the Blind, 3 NY3d 295, 310 [2004]).

ROBERT A. COLE, plf-res, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY, def-ap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal