Henry v. NYC Health & Hospital Corp., 18 F. Supp. 3d 396

Henry, an African‑American female police officer for HHC, sues for discrimination and retaliation under Title VII, § 1981, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL.
Arena and Boylan, HHC supervisors, allegedly made racially charged remarks and publicly mocked Henry’s hair color and skin tone.
Henry alleges Arena removed her from roll call and sent her home, and interfered with overtime and assignments after she complained.
Plaintiff asserts false write-ups for sleeping on duty and scheming to discipline her as retaliation for complaints.
The court dismisses Title VII, § 1981, and NYSHRL claims and declines supplemental jurisdiction over NYCHRL claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there a materially adverse action?	Henry alleges multiple actions harmed terms of employment.	Most actions were mere incidents without material impact.	No adverse action finding; actions lacked material impact.
Was there discriminatory intent (race)?	Disparate treatment and racially charged comments show discrimination.	No plausible causal link between race and actions; comparators not described.	Race discrimination claims dismissed.
Was there discriminatory intent (gender)?	Some actions allegedly reflect gender bias against Henry.	No facts showing gender-based motive; comments were race-based and not gender-specific.	Gender discrimination claims dismissed.
Was there a viable retaliation claim under Title VII/NYSHRL?	Actions followed protected activity and show retaliation.	Temporal proximity and conclusory assertions are insufficient.	Retaliation claims dismissed.

Gutierrez v. City of New York, 756 F. Supp. 2d 491 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (adverse-action standard; requires material impact)
Galabya v. New York Bd. of Educ., 202 F.3d 636 (2d Cir. 2000) (discrimination must affect terms of employment)
James v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 849 F. Supp. 2d 296 (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (adverse-action and discrimination standards applied)