Castagna v. Luceno, 744 F.3d 254

Castagna worked for Majestic Kitchens, Inc. from April 1, 2005 to July 9, 2008, supervised by Bill Luceno.
She alleges a hostile work environment with lewd, racial, and sexual comments and other abuse toward women, with men allegedly treated differently.
On July 9, 2008 Luceno allegedly shoved Castagna’s monitor; she resigned fearing for safety and filed a police report.
Approximately 3–6 months later Castagna filed an EEOC discrimination charge alleging sex discrimination, describing the monitor incident.
After receiving an EEOC right-to-sue letter on August 14, 2009, Castagna filed a federal complaint on November 9, 2009 asserting Title VII and NYSHRL and state tort claims of IIED, assault, and battery.
The district court dismissed the state tort claims as untimely under CPLR 215(8) and rejected tolling based on the EEOC filing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does an EEOC charge toll the statute of limitations for state-law tort claims?	Castagna argues tolling should apply to preserve claims.	Majestic argues no tolling applies.	No tolling; EEOC filing does not toll state tort claims.
Should New York tolling apply during EEOC pendency?	Castagna contends NY tolling applies.	The issue was not preserved below.	Forfeited; court does not decide NY tolling.

Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 421 U.S. 454 (1975) (EEOC filing does not toll limitations for related federal claims; statutory remedies are independent; not tolled by EEOC proceedings)
Juarez v. Ameritech Mobile Communications, Inc., 957 F.2d 317 (7th Cir. 1992) (Seventh Circuit held no tolling of state tort claims by EEOC filing in similar context)
Arnold v. United States, 816 F.2d 1306 (9th Cir. 1987) (Ninth Circuit held no tolling of state law claims arising from same facts as Title VII during EEOC pendency)
City of Pontiac Gen. Emps.’ Ret. Sys. v. MBIA, Inc., 637 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2011) (De novo review of statute-of-limitations rulings; tolling considerations discussed)