525 F. App'x 26
2d Cir.2013Background
- Fattoruso sues Hilton Grand Vacations Co., LLC under NYCHRL alleging retaliation for raising concerns about a supervisor's relationship with a subordinate.
- District Court granted Hilton's Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of the retaliation claim.
- The NYCHRL retaliation standard requires protected activity, awareness by the employer, a adverse employment action, and a causal link.
- The supervisor's relationship involved a consensual relationship; Fattoruso claimed it was discriminatory and created a hostile environment.
- Court held Fattoruso failed to allege protected activity because the complained conduct was not unlawful discrimination based on sex, and Hilton was not shown to have understood that Fattoruso challenged sex-based disparate treatment.
- The Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the retaliation claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiff states a prima facie NYCHRL retaliation claim | Fattoruso alleges he opposed sex discrimination and hostile environment. | Hilton contends complaints did not allege protected activity based on sex. | No prima facie retaliation because activity not shown as protected |
| Whether the complained conduct was unlawful discrimination based on sex | Complaints implied sex-based preferential treatment violated policy. | Patronage in a consensual relationship is not unlawful sex discrimination. | Paramour preference not unlawful discrimination; not protected activity |
| Whether Hilton had notice of protected activity | Hilton was aware of complaints about favoritism and environment. | Complaints did not explicitly allege sex discrimination. | No implied notice that plaintiff challenged sex-based disparate treatment |
Key Cases Cited
- Galdieri-Ambrosini v. Nat’l Realty & Dev. Corp., 136 F.3d 276 (2d Cir. 1998) (employer must understand plaintiff’s opposition was to conduct prohibited by Title VII)
- DeCintio v. Westchester Cnty. Med. Ctr., 807 F.2d 304 (2d Cir. 1986) (unlawful conduct must be implicated in protected activity)
- Kessler v. Westchester Cnty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 461 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2006) (plaintiff need only have a good faith, reasonable belief)
- El Sayed v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 627 F.3d 931 (2d Cir. 2010) (discusses rebuttable presumption of retaliation)