Eubanks v. New York City Department of Education

Background

Magistrate Judge Cave issued a Report and Recommendation on February 3, 2021, advising the court to grant in part and deny in part the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment is a decision without a trial when the evidence does not present a genuine dispute requiring a jury’s resolution.

Eubanks objected only to the recommendation that her hostile-work-environment claims against Ureña and Reingold be dismissed. The defendants did not object to any part of the recommendation.

Claims Recommended for Dismissal

The recommendation granted summary judgment for the defendants on:

- Eubanks’s age-discrimination and retaliation claims against all defendants; - her race-discrimination claims under Title VII, the federal workplace-discrimination law, against all defendants; - her race-discrimination, retaliation, and hostile-work-environment claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law against the New York City Department of Education; - her discrimination claims under those New York laws against Ureña and Reingold; and - her hostile-work-environment claims under Title VII and the two New York laws against Ureña and Reingold.

As to the hostile-work-environment claims against Ureña and Reingold, the district court reviewed the recommendation independently because Eubanks objected. The court concluded that Eubanks presented no evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that either person contributed to a hostile work environment or failed to take appropriate corrective action. The court noted Eubanks’s admission that she never reported student harassment to Reingold or Principal Ureña while at Art and Design.

Claims Remaining

The recommendation denied summary judgment on Eubanks’s:

- Title VII retaliation claim against the Department of Education; - retaliation claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law against Ureña and Reingold; and - Title VII hostile-work-environment claim against the Department of Education.

Ruling

Judge Lewis J. Liman found no error in the uncontested portions of the recommendation and rejected Eubanks’s objection. The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety and ordered that the defendants’ motion for summary judgment was GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The court also scheduled a telephonic conference to set a deadline for a joint pretrial order and a trial date on the remaining claims.