| Sukram v Anjost Corp. |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 02979 [72 AD3d 491] |
| April 13, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Shareen Sukram, Appellant, v Anjost Corporation et al.,Respondents. |
—[*1] Venable LLP, New York (Shaffin A. Datoo of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered on January 23, 2009, whichgranted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint alleging claims ofunlawful discrimination due to sexual harassment and retaliatory firing, unanimously reversed,on the law, without costs, the motion denied, and the complaint reinstated.
Inasmuch as there are triable issues of fact as to, inter alia, whether defendants knew of theirsenior manager's acts of sexual harassment, the extent of such conduct, and whether theyencouraged or condoned it (see Claytonv Best Buy Co., Inc., 48 AD3d 277 [2008]), the grant of summary judgment dismissingthe claims of unlawful discrimination under both the New York State Human Rights Law and theNew York City Human Rights Law was not warranted.
Consequently, since disposition of the discrimination claims must await adjudication by afactfinder, dismissal of the claims of unlawful retaliatory discharge from employment under boththe State and City Human Rights Laws was also precluded. In any event, the circumstancessurrounding the alleged unlawful discharge present their own unique questions, includingwhether the reasons given by defendants were pretextual, that cannot be resolved on this record.Concur—Andrias, J.P., Nardelli, Catterson, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.