The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 22, 23, 30, 31, 32 were read on this motion to/for DISMISS. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION In this employment action for harassment and failure to hire, defendant, Google Inc. (Google), moves pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (a) (7) for an order dismissing the complaint as against it. Plaintiff, Erica Bernhard, opposes. By interim decision and order dated March 31, 2022, the branch of the motion seeking dismissal of the third cause of action for breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing was granted. For the reasons set forth more fully below, the remainder of the motion is denied. Background The Parties Plaintiff, a 30-year-old, female, who resides in New York City, is an artist and business owner of Covalent Artists Inc., a company specializing in art installations and new media arts. Google is an American multinational technology company specializing in Internet related services and products, with offices located at 111 8th Avenue, New York, New York 10011. Defendant Adam Katz (Katz) was at all relevant times herein, employed by Google as the creative lead at “Google Creative Lab” (GCL), Google’s internal marketing agency. GCL is known for its collection of the brightest designers, writers, business leaders, filmmakers, animators, producers and creative technologists. General Background On or about January 14, 2019, plaintiff was introduced to Katz by plaintiff’s then-manager for the purpose of obtaining an interview with Katz for a position with GCL. According to plaintiff, one of her dreams was to join GCL as either an employee on their creative team or as an independent contractor working on large scale projects (complaint, 22). After being introduced via email to Katz, who plaintiff believed was responsible for hiring and contracting with new talent for upcoming Google projects, she was worried about Katz’s lack of professionalism. Specifically, after the introduction through her then manager, Katz began to email plaintiff directly on a separate email chain (id., 25). On January 15, 2019, plaintiff met Katz at the Google office in New York City (id., 26). During this interview, Defendant Katz explained to Plaintiff that he builds the team at GCL and “she could either be brought on as an employee of Google or as a contractor, where she would be placed on approximately eight to nine projects in the first month, and then would be brought in full-time to work on the three projects she had the best ideas for” (id., 27). Plaintiff thought the interview went well. Katz told her that he looked forward to working with her on projects and that he would introduce her to the Google events team (id., 28-29). The next day, Katz emailed plaintiff about Google’s sponsorship of the Tokyo Summer 2020 Olympics project. Plaintiff replied that same day stating that it would be a dream project. On February 1, 2019, Katz emailed plaintiff requesting a second meeting and for her personal cell phone number (complaint, 33). The parties met a second time at Google on February 25, 2019, during which time Katz explained the scope of work on a Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics project and an A.I. documentary, the estimated budget for contractors, what plaintiff’s role would be and how the onboarding process works at Google (id., 42). After the meeting, however, Katz apparently switched back to personal text exchanges with plaintiff. According to plaintiff, Katz continued to pursue a personal relationship with plaintiff (id., 49). She provides partial text messages that purportedly show Katz’s inappropriate texting with plaintiff, with her attempts to keep it professional emphasizing her desire to work at and/or with Google (id.,
50-64, see also plaintiff exhibit A — T, NYSCEF Doc. No. 2). Plaintiff felt that despite Katz’s alleged inappropriateness, once she was hired by Google, her work would stand out and she would not have to deal with Katz on a one-on-one basis (id.,
