Singh v. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Background

Manisha Singh, proceeding without a lawyer, brought claims against Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), Sloan Kettering Institute for Cancer Research (SKI), Dr. N.V. Kishore Pillarsetty, and MD Steven M. Larson. The opinion states that Singh asserted discrimination and retaliation claims against MSKCC and SKI under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law against all defendants. She also asserted civil battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims against all defendants, plus a defamation per se claim against Pillarsetty and Larson.

Singh alleged that Pillarsetty, her direct supervisor, subjected her to unwanted sexual advances and contact between approximately September 2014 and August 2016. She also alleged that she reported the conduct to multiple MSKCC and SKI employees, including Larson, Pillarsetty’s supervisor, and that her employment contract was terminated in retaliation for those complaints. She further alleged that defendants made or published false statements about her to prospective employers.

Motion and Report

Defendants moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 for partial summary judgment. They sought judgment for Pillarsetty and Larson on the defamation per se claim; for MSKCC, SKI, and Larson on the civil battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims; and for all defendants on the negligent infliction of emotional distress claim. Singh did not file an opposition.

Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox recommended granting the motion in its entirety. No party objected. Judge Daniels reviewed the report for clear error and adopted it in full.

Defamation Per Se

The court held that Singh failed to sufficiently allege a defamation per se claim against Pillarsetty or Larson. Under New York law, defamation generally requires a false statement, publication to a third party without privilege or authorization, fault, and either special harm or a statement that qualifies as defamation per se. Singh’s allegation that defendants published intentionally false statements was conclusory, and the court found no evidence supporting any element of the claim. The court therefore determined that dismissal of the defamation per se claim was warranted.

Civil Battery and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

The court granted summary judgment to MSKCC, SKI, and Larson on Singh’s civil battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims. Those claims were based on Pillarsetty’s alleged unwanted sexual contact and sexual harassment. Under the respondeat superior doctrine, an employer may be vicariously liable for an employee’s conduct only when the conduct was in furtherance of the employer’s business and within the scope of employment. The court concluded that Pillarsetty’s alleged sexual misconduct was not in furtherance of the business of MSKCC, SKI, or Larson and was outside the scope of Pillarsetty’s employment. The claims against those defendants were dismissed.

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

The court also granted summary judgment to all defendants on Singh’s negligent infliction of emotional distress claim. It concluded that the New York Workers’ Compensation Law provided the exclusive remedy for an injury caused by the negligence or wrongful conduct of another employee in the same employment. The court therefore dismissed this claim as barred by that law.

Disposition

Judge George B. Daniels adopted Magistrate Judge Fox’s report and recommendation. The defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment was granted. The ruling covered Singh’s defamation per se claim against Pillarsetty and Larson, her civil battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against MSKCC, SKI, and Larson, and her negligent infliction of emotional distress claim against all defendants. The opinion does not state a disposition for Singh’s remaining claims.