McGarvey v. Foley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McGarvey v. Foley

294 A.D.2d 226, 741 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5332

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 21, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 226 (McGarvey v. Foley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McGarvey v. Foley, 294 A.D.2d 226, 741 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5332 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.), entered May 3, 2001, denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Accepting plaintiffs allegations as true and resolving all reasonable inferences from those allegations in plaintiffs favor, as we must in the present procedural context (see, Cron v Hargro, 91 NY2d 362, 366), the complaint sufficiently pleads a claim for sexual harassment based on a hostile work environment. Plaintiffs allegations portray the subject workplace as one “permeated with ‘discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult,’ * * * that is ‘sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [her] employment and create an abusive working environment’” (Harris v Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 US 17, 21, quoting Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v Vinson, 477 US 57, 65, 67) and that the ridicule and insults weré gender-based. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Wallach and Gonzalez, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.), entered May 3, 2001, denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Accepting plaintiffs allegations as true and resolving all reasonable inferences from those allegations in plaintiffs favor, as we must in the present procedural context (see, Cron v Hargro, 91 NY2d 362, 366), the complaint sufficiently pleads a claim for sexual harassment based on a hostile work environment. Plaintiffs allegations portray the subject workplace as one “permeated with ‘discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult,’ * * * that is ‘sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [her] employment and create an abusive working environment’” (Harris v Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 US 17, 21, quoting Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v Vinson, 477 US 57, 65, 67) and that the ridicule and insults weré gender-based. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Wallach and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 226, 741 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgarvey-v-foley-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack