Alexander v. Private Protective Servs. Inc.

Security Firm Lacked Relationship Rendering It Liable Under NYCHRL Over Film Shoot Access

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Jeriel Alexander (“Alexander”) brings this action against Defendant Private Protective Services, Inc. (“PPS”), a private security services firm. Alexander asserts that PPS unlawfully discriminated against him under the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”) by denying him entrance into a film shoot on the basis of his race. Before the Court is PPS’s motion for summary judgment on Alexander’s NYCHRL claim, as well as applications by Alexander for Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron to recuse himself from the case. Judge Aaron conducted a thorough and careful review and issued a Report and Recommendation on November 2, 2023 advising that PPS’s motion for summary judgment be granted and that Alexander’s applications for recusal be denied. (ECF No. 158 (“R&R” or “Report”).) For the reasons that follow, the Court adopts the Report in its entirety. I. Background The Court assumes familiarity with the facts and history of the case based on the recitation of facts in Judge Aaron’s thorough Report (see R&R at 2-3), as well as this Court’s prior opinions. See Alexander v. Priv. Protective Servs., Inc., No. 19-CV-10004, 2022 WL 1567447 (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 2022) (ECF No. 70) (“Alexander I”); Alexander v. Priv. Protective Servs., Inc., No. 19-CV-10004, 2022 WL 16555312 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2022) (ECF No. 103) (“Alexander II”). As relevant here, Alexander formerly worked as a security guard for PPS, a provider of private security services, from 2017 through 2018. (ECF No. 135

3, 5; ECF No. 143 at 14 1.) In taking the job, Alexander signed a hire packet that included the condition that he would “not seek employment or work for any PPS Inc. customers” for “a period of 5 years immediately following the termination of [his] employment with PPS Inc.” (ECF No. 135

Alexander v. Private Protective Servs. Inc.

Security Firm Lacked Relationship Rendering It Liable Under NYCHRL Over Film Shoot Access

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal