United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019-06-21
42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: civil; Section 1981 contract and equal-benefit claims by a clinic patient against the building's security contractor over a guard's laughter at a porter's racial slurs in the lobby; contractor's Rule 12(b)(6) motion granted with prejudice as to Section 1981 (S.D.N.Y.); result: claimant-lost; claim:
Uncertainty
Element racial-intent: route: direct evidence of the actor's own animus (laughter at slurs); none of comparator / pretext-evidence / decisionmaker-attribution fits
Element catalogue-scope: other: catalogue-scope is the nearest declared id for the non-contract "full and equal benefit" clause, which the law file does not decompose
Misfit
None recorded
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 15
| Case | Persons protected by equal contractual rights | Plaintiff has rights in an existing or proposed contract | Formation performance termination or contractual benefits | Judicial intentional-race-discrimination requirement | Judicial but-for causation of contractual injury | Nongovernmental impairment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 7–12 of 15
| Case | Judicial section 1983 remedial route for state-law impairment | Opposition to racial impairment of contract rights | Judicial defendant-knowledge requirement for retaliation | Judicial material-adversity requirement for retaliation | Judicial causation requirement for retaliatory injury | Contract and retaliation scope with noncontract clauses identified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 13–15 of 15
| Case | Judicial hostile-environment threshold and attribution | Claim-specific limitations and accrual | Compensatory equitable punitive and fee remedies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — not · law (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Contract and retaliation scope with noncontract clauses identified | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: law | equal-benefit-clause-claim-resting-only-on-a-municipal-anti-discrimination-ordinance | To establish a violation of Section 1981's guarantee of "full and equal benefit" of laws, a plaintiff must "[i] allege racial animus ...; [ii] identify a relevant 'law or proceeding for the security of persons and property;' and [iii] allege that defendants deprived them of the 'full and equal benefit' thereof."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [21420:21733] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Plaintiff has alleged no nexus to state law, as the sole allegation discussed in this context is a violation the NYCHRL, a local anti-discrimination ordinance.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [22919:23078] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Accordingly, it concludes that Plaintiff cannot base a cause of action under Section 1981 on the violation of a law of New York City.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [24385:24518] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b. |
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — not · pleaded (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Formation performance termination or contractual benefits | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; theory: the lobby encounters impaired the contracted-for experience with the tenant; subject: theory=the lobby encounters impaired the contracted-for experience with the tenant The court took the patient's relationship with the clinic as the contract and held only that it did not reach the lobby encounters; it did not hold that plaintiff lacked a contract of his own, so no own-contract block is recorded. | racial-abuse-in-building-lobby-on-the-way-to-and-from-tenant-clinic-without-denial-of-access | The Court finds that Plaintiff must plead he was directly denied the benefits of his contract, not that the conduct affected his decision not to continue engagement with a contractual partner.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [45155:45347] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Plaintiff was not prevented from entering or exiting Access at any point on either day.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [20039:20126] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Plaintiff alleges that he did not attend his August 2016 follow-up appointment at Access, as he feared further racial harassment from Rivera and Brooks.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [5135:5287] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.The Court concludes that while blocking physical access to the lobby might prevent the formation of a contract with Access, Plaintiff has failed to allege that the contractual relationship with Access extended to interpersonal dealings he might have in the lobby while entering or exiting the building.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [19472:19774] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b. |
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — not · pleaded (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Formation performance termination or contractual benefits | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; theory: the security contractor interfered with plaintiff's contract with a building tenant (the clinic); subject: theory=the security contractor interfered with plaintiff's contract with a building tenant (the clinic) | lobby-security-guard-with-no-authority-over-or-awareness-of-patients-contract-with-tenant-clinic | "liability under [ Section] 1981 for interference with a third-party contract attaches only to persons who actually had the power or authority to prevent the plaintiffs from contracting with the third party."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [16498:16706] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.On June 21, 2016, Plaintiff entered the lobby of 83 Maiden Lane to make an appointment with Access Community Health Center ("Access"), a tenant of the building.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [1617:1777] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Plaintiff makes no allegation that Brooks was aware of Plaintiff's contract with Access, or that he or anyone else at UPS possessed sufficient authority to interfere with Plaintiff's ability to contract with Access.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [17526:17741] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Plaintiff has thus failed to allege that UPS can be held liable for interference with Plaintiff's contract.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [18427:18534] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b. |
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Nongovernmental impairment | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded | lobby-security-services-company | Defendant UPS is a New York limited liability company that contracted to provide security services to 83 Maiden Lane.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [1444:1561] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b. |
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Persons protected by equal contractual rights | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded | asian-american | Plaintiff is an Asian-American man who resides in Queens, New York.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [1128:1195] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b. |
| Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc. — 385 F. Supp. 3d 224 (2019) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc1981: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Judicial intentional-race-discrimination requirement | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded | security-guard-laughing-at-coworkers-racial-slurs-on-two-occasions | "To establish a violation of [ Section] 1981, a plaintiff must show that a defendant's acts were purposefully discriminatory and racially motivated."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [9460:9609] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Plaintiff alleges that within his earshot, Rivera said to Brooks, "That chink says he's not Chinese, he said he's Korean. How can I tell the difference? All chinks look the same."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [2242:2421] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.He further alleges that both Rivera and Brooks laughed after this comment.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [2430:2504] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.Brooks and Rivera laughed together in response to these comments.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [2668:2733] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.The words "he ain't gonna say nothing to you" contain no reference to race, and Brooks took no action towards Plaintiff at that time.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [13512:13645] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b.the Court finds that allegations of repeated laughter in response to racist slurs in two separate incidents is sufficient to plead an intent to discriminate.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_385.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/385/0224-01; Unicode character offsets [13223:13380] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f29c44f2016756282164a32fb21b2c74eb5c6b0c427966477adcbf86cf6b918b. |