Nancy Erika Smith of Smith Mullin and David Osterman of Goldberg Segalla. Courtesy photos.

Jury selection began Tuesday for a former PNC Bank employee who claims the company failed to protect her from a sexual assault by a customer.

While much attention has been focused on corporate liability for sexual harassment by managers against subordinates, the PNC Bank trial could shed light on the extent of an employer's obligation to protect its workers from misconduct by customers or other outsiders. The trial before Superior Court Judge Robert Gardner is expected to last three to four weeks.

Plaintiff Damara Scott claims she was sexually assaulted while leaving the PNC branch in Glen Ridge in October 2013. Patrick Pignatello, who was standing in the vestibule outside the bank entrance, pressed his crotch into Scott's buttocks and rubbed against her, according to the suit.

Pignatello had a history of groping and harassing female employees and customers at PNC Bank and had occasionally been banned from the Glen Ridge branch, but bank management always let him come back, the suit claims. The company refused to close Pignatello's accounts because he was an investment customer who could have referred further business to the bank, Scott claims.

Scott reported the incident to police, who charged Pignatello, 77, with criminal sexual contact. He died a few weeks later from an apparent heart attack while shoveling snow, according to an article on NJ.com.

Scott is represented by Nancy Erika Smith of Smith Mullin, along with Elizabeth attorney Randy Davenport. Smith represented former Fox News personality Gretchen Carlson in a sexual harassment suit against Roger Ailes, the network's former chairman. PNC Bank is represented by David Osterman of Goldberg Segalla.

Smith said in a statement that PNC has a policy of zero tolerance toward sexual harassment by a manager, supervisor or any other employee, customer, vendor or visitor. "This means all employees must take all appropriate measures to prevent sexual harassment by anyone," she said in a statement.

"PNC Bank chose profits over the safety of its female employees," Smith said. "The bank security manager admitted that the bank should have closed Pignatello's account. Apparently, the bank thought that an investment client deserved a free pass to harass."

Scott sued Pignatello's estate as well as PNC. She settled her claim with the estate under terms that were not disclosed. PNC has asked for permission to apportion fault between the bank and Pignatello, even though his estate settled with Scott.

PNC has argued that the incident involving Pignatello does not create a claim because he is not Scott's boss. In a motion for summary judgment filed in March 2019, PNC Bank said the suit was "an attempt at a significant expansion of the protections afforded under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination." The incident was completely unforeseeable, did not occur in the workplace and was entirely outside of PNC's control, the bank's motion said.

"This is critically important given that plaintiff's narrow path to a recovery in this case is through the LAD, which, by its very definition, is a workplace protection statute so that individuals are not subject to unwarranted advances or conduct, within the workplace, by individuals who have power over them within the workplace. Pignatello does not remotely fall into that category of individual," the bank said in its motion.

The motion for summary judgment also disputes Scott's claim that bank employees knew Pignatello had a history of unwelcome contact with female employees.

Superior Court Judge Bridget Stecher denied PNC's motion for summary judgment on June 21, 2019.

A PNC statement about the case disputed Scott's claim that she was sexually assaulted.

"No allegation of sexual assault should be taken lightly, and PNC has a long-standing commitment to providing a safe environment for our employees and customers to work and do business," said the statement from PNC spokeswoman Marcy Zwiebel. "It is unfortunate that plaintiff's counsel has chosen to brand an elderly customer, now deceased, as a sexual predator who allegedly sexually assaulted the plaintiff when that will not be established by the evidence, including a video of the interaction between the customer and plaintiff. We look forward to presenting the evidence in court, which will make it clear what actually occurred."