Sosa v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ. & Marcy Berger

Facts

1. 1 Persons protected by equal contractual rights satisfied pleaded

   Sosa identifies as an African American woman of West Indian origin, with darker-hued skin color.

2. 2 Plaintiff has rights in an existing or proposed contract satisfied pleaded

   Sosa has been employed with the NYCDOE since 1996 and has been a special education teacher since 2004 at P4Q@213, which is located at 67th Avenue in Queens, New York.

3. 3 Formation performance termination or contractual benefits not pleaded

   "A plaintiff sustains an adverse employment action if he or she endures a materially adverse change in the terms and conditions of employment."

4. 3 Formation performance termination or contractual benefits not pleaded

   As to the failure to accommodate and the related delay, Sosa alleges Defendants failed to provide her with a single prep period on one day of the work week, as she had originally requested.

5. 3 Formation performance termination or contractual benefits not pleaded

   For one thing, because she received almost everything she asked for, there was no negative change in her employment conditions; and one prep period cannot be seen as anything but a de minimis change.

6. 3 Formation performance termination or contractual benefits not pleaded

   As to the allegations of professional misconduct, Sosa alleges Defendants improperly accused her of missing work, which resulted in at least two disciplinary letters in her file.

7. 3 Formation performance termination or contractual benefits not pleaded

   Accepting that Sosa was treated differently with respect to these items, there is no allegation they affected her pay, are related to benefits or privileges of employment, or evidenced a demotion.

8. 3 Formation performance termination or contractual benefits not pleaded

   Without an identifiable adverse employment action, Sosa's claims for race and skin color discrimination under § 1981 and § 1983 must be dismissed.

9. 4 Judicial intentional-race-discrimination requirement not pleaded

   Plaintiff must do more than make conclusory legal allegations that she is substantially similar to her colleagues in order to adequately plead this claim.

10. 4 Judicial intentional-race-discrimination requirement not pleaded

    Here, the fact that Plaintiff and her colleagues are all teachers is not enough.

11. 4 Judicial intentional-race-discrimination requirement not pleaded

    Plaintiff alleges that "defendants regularly granted the requests of other Caucasian, non-African American teachers for scheduling changes and classroom transfers."

12. 4 Judicial intentional-race-discrimination requirement not pleaded

    However, Plaintiff "fails to describe who these people are, what their responsibilities were, how their workplace conduct compared to [hers], or how they were treated."

13. 4 Judicial intentional-race-discrimination requirement not pleaded

    Accordingly, based on its de novo review, the Court adopts the R & R's recommendation that the Plaintiff's § 1981 and Title VII disparate treatment claims be dismissed.

14. 14 Judicial hostile-environment threshold and attribution not pleaded

    However, the facts alleged by Plaintiff in her complaint and attached exhibits do not support any inference "that a hostile work environment was created and existed because of [her] protected status, either race, color, or national origin."

15. 14 Judicial hostile-environment threshold and attribution not pleaded

    Plaintiff's allegations that she "is the only teacher of West Indian Origin in her unit at P4Q@PS213," that she "is the teacher with the darkest skin color," and that she "is the only African American teacher in her unit at P4Q@PS213 with a disability" (Complaint at ¶¶ 16-18) are not enough to support an inference of causation.

16. 14 Judicial hostile-environment threshold and attribution not pleaded

    Thus, this objection does not provide a basis for rejecting or modifying the R & R and the Court adopts the R & R's recommendation that Plaintiff's § 1981, Title VII, and ADA claims of hostile work environment be dismissed.