Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Jury Awards $5.2 Million in Disability Case
A jury awarded $5.2 million to a plaintiff whose former employer, a modeling agency, failed to accommodate her asthma, subjected her to a hostile work environment, and terminated her in retaliation for making complaints about smoking in the workplace. Gallegos v. Elite Model Mgmt. Corp., No. 120577/00 (N.Y. Co. Sup. Ct. 5/14/03)
In an interview before she was hired, the plaintiff told the employer that she was asthmatic and asked the employer to curb the pervasive smoking in the workplace that she had observed and which she believed was prohibited by law. The employer assured her that it would, but failed to do so.
The employee suffered several asthmatic attacks after commencing employment, which she and her physician attributed to the smoking in her workplace. She made numerous complaints but her employer failed to act on those complaints or on her requests to curtail smoking or relocate her to a smoke-free area. Instead, the agency allegedly told her that smoking was inextricably linked to the modeling industry. The agency also demoted her to a position that was located in an area even more permeated with smoke.
The agency terminated the employee after only 7 weeks of employment on the Monday after she faxed her superiors a letter requesting time to consult with an attorney. The employer's termination letter cited her health problems and previously undocumented poor interpersonal skills as its reasons for terminating her.
The jury found that the employer violated the State and City Human Rights Laws, and returned a verdict in favor of the employee for $297,814.00 in back pay, $375,776.00 in future lost earnings, $2 million for physical and emotional pain and suffering, and $2.6 million in punitive damages, which was more than was sought by plaintiff's attorneys.
A jury awarded $5.2 million to a plaintiff whose former employer, a modeling agency, failed to accommodate her asthma, subjected her to a hostile work environment, and terminated her in retaliation for making complaints about smoking in the workplace. Gallegos v. Elite Model Mgmt. Corp., No. 120577/00 (N.Y. Co. Sup. Ct. 5/14/03)
In an interview before she was hired, the plaintiff told the employer that she was asthmatic and asked the employer to curb the pervasive smoking in the workplace that she had observed and which she believed was prohibited by law. The employer assured her that it would, but failed to do so.
The employee suffered several asthmatic attacks after commencing employment, which she and her physician attributed to the smoking in her workplace. She made numerous complaints but her employer failed to act on those complaints or on her requests to curtail smoking or relocate her to a smoke-free area. Instead, the agency allegedly told her that smoking was inextricably linked to the modeling industry. The agency also demoted her to a position that was located in an area even more permeated with smoke.
The agency terminated the employee after only 7 weeks of employment on the Monday after she faxed her superiors a letter requesting time to consult with an attorney. The employer's termination letter cited her health problems and previously undocumented poor interpersonal skills as its reasons for terminating her.
The jury found that the employer violated the State and City Human Rights Laws, and returned a verdict in favor of the employee for $297,814.00 in back pay, $375,776.00 in future lost earnings, $2 million for physical and emotional pain and suffering, and $2.6 million in punitive damages, which was more than was sought by plaintiff's attorneys.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.