Semper v. New York Methodist Hospital, 786 F. Supp. 2d 566

Plaintiff Melvina Semper, a Black registered nurse, was employed by Methodist Hospital from June 2003 until September 12, 2008, when she was terminated or constructively discharged.
Plaintiff alleges discriminatory hiring in 2007, claiming white, less-qualified candidates were chosen for nurse manager positions after she applied.
Plaintiff criticized supervision practices in 2007-2008, alleging inadequate oversight led to incorrect medication prescribing and dosages for elderly patients, and she warned of formal complaints if unaddressed.
Plaintiff contends she was harassed and monitored following her complaints, including threats of termination, before her September 12, 2008 discharge.
Plaintiff filed an EEOC charge on July 15, 2009; the EEOC issued a Dismissal and Rights Letter on August 14, 2009, and suit was filed in state court and removed here; Plaintiff later sought to amend with additional claims and facts.
Amended complaint adds claims about vacation/sick-time accrual and non-payment after termination, and a grievance filed by the Union on August 6, 2008 that allegedly was not processed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Zanko can be sued under Title VII	Semper seeks Title VII against Zanko as an individual.	There is no individual Title VII liability.	Claims against Zanko dismissed
Whether Title VII claims were timely filed	EEOC charge timelines should be tolled or ongoing violations save timely filing.	Charge filed 306 days after termination; time-barred absent tolling or continuing-violation relief.	Title VII claims time-barred
Equitable tolling and continuing violation doctrine	Delay was excusable due to lost mail or misdelivery and attorney miscommunication; tolling should apply.	Delay was ordinary neglect; no extraordinary circumstances or EEOC misdirection by employer; tolling not warranted.	Equitable tolling and continuing violation not applicable
Whether continuing violation saves pre-termination claims	Ongoing withholding of vacation and sick pay constitutes continuing discrimination.	Withholding benefits is a discrete act and does not constitute ongoing policy; pre-termination acts remain time-barred.	Continuing violation doctrine inapplicable; pre-termination claims time-barred
Whether state-law tort/contract claims are preempted by the LMRA	Tortious interference, breach of implied covenant, and IIED can stand alongside federal labor claims.	Claims preempted under Section 301 LMRA because resolution depends on CBA terms; IIED largely preempted.	State-law claims preempted or fail to state a claim; no viable LMRA §301 claim; amendment futile

Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (U.S. 2002) (notice pleading suffices in discrimination cases; no heightened prima facie requirement)
Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Leuck, 471 U.S. 202 (U.S. 1985) (preemption where contract meaning governs state-law claim)
Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., 486 U.S. 399 (U.S. 1988) (preemption when resolution depends on collective-bargaining agreement)
National R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101 (U.S. 2002) (300-day filing period for Title VII; discrete acts do not toll for late claims)
Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 455 U.S. 385 (U.S. 1982) (equitable tolling of EEOC time limits where appropriate)
Irwin v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89 (U.S. 1990) (equitable tolling limited to extraordinary circumstances; attorney neglect insufficient)
Arista Records LLC v. Doe 3, 604 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2010) (Swierkiewicz framework retained post-Twombly and Iqbal for plausibility)
Wrighten v. Glowski, 232 F.3d 119 (2d Cir. 2000) (Title VII individual liability generally unavailable)