Anthony v. Nemec
Opinion
Plaintiff, a former employee of defendant, commenced this action to recover damages pursuant to the Human Rights Law (Executive Law § 296), alleging that in terminating plaintiff’s employment defendant discriminated against her because of her gender. In particular, plaintiff claims that defendant terminated plaintiff’s employment because plaintiff was a woman of childbearing age who had expressed her intention to become pregnant and take maternity leave.
Among the elements plaintiff must establish to make out a prima facie case of discrimination is a showing that the [884] termination of her employment occurred under circumstances which give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination (see, Sogg v American Airlines, 193 AD2d 153, 156, lv dismissed 83 NY2d 846, lv denied 83 NY2d 754). The inference may be drawn from direct evidence, from statistical evidence or from the fact that the position was filled by a person not in the same protected class.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
225 A.D.2d 883 (Anthony v. Nemec) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.