Nicole Schiano v. Quality Payroll Systems, Inc. And Michael Tintweiss, Docket No. 05-4115 Cv

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “direct evidence of discriminatory intent is rare and such intent often must be inferred from circumstantial evidence found in affidavits and depositions” (internal citation omitted)
• noting that “direct evidence of discriminatory intent is rare and such intent often must be inferred from circumstantial evidence found in affidavits and depositions” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• noting that hostile work environment claims are “‘mixed question[s] of law and fact’ that are ‘especially well-suited for jury determination’” (quoting Richardson v. New York State Dep’t of Corr. Serv., 180 F.3d 426, 437 (2d Cir. 1999)
• applying the same standards to retaliation claims under the NYSHRL as federal claims under Title VII
• finding no adverse employment action when employee was given a new reporting structure but the employer “rescinded the change the following day in response to [employee’s] complaint, and did so with an apology.”
• noting that the question is “ ‘especially well-suited for jury determination,’ ” and even where the facts are undisputed “ ‘summary judgment is appropriate only where application of the law to those undisputed facts will reasonably support only one ultimate conclusion’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).