Practice point: Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination
under either the State or City Human Rights Laws because he failed to allege
that defendants, who rejected plaintiff's screenplay submissions, were actually aware of his
race. Instead, the complaint merely alleges that plaintiff sent
defendants a link to a social networking site that contained his
photograph, and that his photo was
also available on the internet. In fact, the complaint itself suggests
that defendants did not reject his screenplay submissions because of
his race, but because defendants reviewed such submissions only when
they were referred by a movie industry insider, and plaintiff did not
know such an insider. The complaint also fails to allege discrimination under a disparate
impact theory because it fails to allege any facts showing that
defendants' insider-referral policy falls more harshly on black
screenwriter applicants than other groups.
Student note: Plaintiff does not adequately allege that he sought employment with defendants, as
is required to support a State or City claim for unlawful
discriminatory practices in employment by employers, and
discrimination in an employment agency's referrals to an employer, pursuant to Executive Law §§ 296[1][a], [b] and Administrative Code §§ 8-107[1][a],
[b].
Case: Samuels v. William Morris Agency, NY Slip Op 08562 (1st Dept. 2014)
Here is the decision.
Monday's issue: A school bus company's liability for a fight on the bus.
