Barney v. H.E.L.P. Homeless Service Corporation
- Katherine Failla
- 1:19-cv-05959
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 14
In Barney v. H.E.L.P., Judge Failla denied H.E.L.P.’s motion to dismiss, finding equitable tolling made Barney’s Title VII claims timely.
Michael Barney’s Title VII claims were allowed to proceed past H.E.L.P.’s timeliness-based motion to dismiss; the court did not decide the ultimate merits of his discrimination allegations.
What happened
Michael Barney sued H.E.L.P. Homeless Service Corporation, alleging that he faced workplace discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and firing because he is gay. H.E.L.P. argued that Barney filed his federal discrimination claims too late after receiving a notice from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission allowing him to sue.
Barney received the notice on March 6, 2019, but filed his complaint on June 25, 2019—21 days after the usual 90-day deadline. He alleged that a stabbing, hospitalization, medication, physical problems, and lack of access to his phone and laptop prevented him from filing between May 27 and June 19. The court also considered his efforts to find a lawyer before the stabbing.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla ruled that these circumstances justified extending the deadline under equitable tolling and that Barney acted diligently once he regained access to his phone. The court therefore found the action timely and denied H.E.L.P.’s motion to dismiss the Title VII claims.
The detailed version
- Barney v. H.E.L.P. Homeless Service Corporation · No. 1:19-cv-05959
- Katherine Failla
- Apr. 8, 2020
Background
Michael Barney sued H.E.L.P. Homeless Service Corporation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Barney alleged that, because he is gay, he experienced a hostile work environment, retaliation after complaining about discrimination and that environment, and termination because of his sexual orientation.
H.E.L.P. moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not adequately state a legal claim. H.E.L.P.’s motion addressed only Barney’s Title VII claims and argued that they were untimely because Barney did not file the action within 90 days after receiving the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s notice of his right to sue.
Barney received the notice on March 6,
- The 90-day period ended on June 4, 2019, but he filed his original complaint on June 25,
- Before the deadline, Barney alleged that he contacted or tried to contact multiple lawyers and intended to file without a lawyer if necessary. On May 27, his roommate stabbed him in the abdomen. Barney was hospitalized until June 6, received OxyContin, and was placed on a breathing machine. After leaving the hospital, he alleged that he remained physically impaired and in pain, could not return to his apartment until June 10, and did not regain access to his phone and laptop until June
- He contacted a law firm on June 20 and then contacted his present lawyer, who filed the complaint on June 25.
Legal standard
Title VII generally requires a lawsuit to be filed within 90 days after receipt of an EEOC notice of the right to sue. The court explained that equitable tolling is an exception that can extend a filing deadline when the plaintiff acted with reasonable diligence, extraordinary circumstances prevented timely filing, and those circumstances caused the missed deadline. A plaintiff must provide a particularized description of how the circumstances affected the ability to pursue legal rights.
Analysis
The court considered only the stabbing and recovery because Barney’s opposition papers relied on those events as the extraordinary circumstance supporting tolling. The court held that the stabbing, ten-day hospitalization, medication, breathing-machine treatment, physical impairment, inability to return home, and loss of access to his phone and laptop were sufficiently extraordinary. It also found that Barney had adequately explained why he could not file between May 27 and June 19.
The court rejected H.E.L.P.’s argument that Barney’s condition was not severe enough. It also rejected the argument that Barney had waited too long before the stabbing. The court found that Barney had contacted several lawyers, and that his conduct did not show such neglect that equitable tolling should be denied. The court further found that Barney acted reasonably promptly after the extraordinary circumstances ended by contacting a law firm the day after regaining his phone.
Because Barney had eight or nine days remaining in the 90-day period when he was stabbed, the court found that tolling through June 19 gave him enough time to file on June 25. The court therefore ruled that the action was timely.
Disposition
Judge Katherine Polk Failla denied H.E.L.P.’s motion to dismiss. The opinion did not decide whether Barney ultimately proved the alleged discrimination, retaliation, or hostile work environment. It directed H.E.L.P. to file a responsive pleading by April 29, 2020, and directed the parties to submit a proposed case-management plan and joint status letter by May 13, 2020.
Read the full 14-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.