A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit once again highlights that court’s reluctance to grant summary judgment in hostile work environment cases where ambiguities abound in the record and the jury may find that otherwise neutral mistreatment was motivated by illegitimate racial or gender bias.
‘Rivera v. Rochester GRTA’
In Rivera v. Rochester Genesee Regional Transportation Authority,1 decided on Dec. 21, 2012, two plaintiffsEnio R. Rivera and Michael Taltonclaimed they endured racial and national origin harassment on the job. The district court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment on all claims. Talton’s claimthat coworkers and a supervisor taunted him with racial slurs and occasionally did so in a physically threatening mannerwas relatively straightforward, prompting the Second Circuit to hold that a jury may find that his work environment was sufficiently hostile on account of his race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
