Montana v. City of Mount Vernon

Background

Brittany Montana sued the City of Mount Vernon and the Mount Vernon Fire Department, alleging that they discriminated against her because of sex when they failed to hire her as a firefighter. She asserted claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal law prohibiting employment discrimination based on sex, and the New York State Human Rights Law.

Montana passed the written portion of the 2014 firefighter examination and ranked 119 on the resulting eligibility list. The list was active from 2015 through 2019, and the defendants used it to appoint firefighters as late as April 20, 2018. Montana did not take the physical test for the 2018 examination and therefore did not qualify for that examination’s eligibility list. She filed a discrimination charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on June 26, 2018.

The defendants moved for summary judgment, which asks the court to enter judgment without a trial when there is no genuine dispute over an important fact. They argued that Montana’s claims based on the 2014 examination were time-barred. They also made separate arguments concerning the 2018 examination, including that Montana could not establish discrimination and lacked standing to assert those claims.

Court’s Analysis

The court rejected the defendants’ division of the case into separate claims concerning the 2014 and 2018 examinations. It understood Montana’s complaint to allege one continuing discriminatory hiring practice involving the eligibility list that remained active from 2015 to 2019. Because of that conclusion, the court did not address arguments directed only at claims specifically based on the 2018 examination.

For the Title VII claim, a discrimination charge generally must be filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice. The court explained that a continuing violation may extend the filing period when an employer repeatedly carries out a discriminatory policy or practice. In that situation, earlier acts may be considered if the charge is filed within 300 days of the last act carried out under the policy.

The court found the continuing-violation doctrine applicable. It relied on evidence that the defendants continuously used an allegedly discriminatory eligibility list from 2015 through 2019 and made hiring decisions from that list as late as April 20, 2018. Montana filed her charge 67 days later, on June 26, 2018. The court therefore concluded that her Title VII claim was timely.

The court reached the same conclusion for Montana’s New York State Human Rights Law claim. That claim has a three-year limitations period, and the court stated that the continuing-violation principles also apply to it. Because the alleged hiring practices continued to affect Montana at least through April 2018, the court concluded that the state-law claim was timely as well.

Ruling

Judge Kenneth M. Karas denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the pending motion, and the court scheduled a telephonic status conference for December 1, 2023. The opinion did not resolve whether the defendants ultimately discriminated against Montana; it resolved the defendants’ summary-judgment arguments and concluded that the claims were not time-barred.