United States District Court, E.D. New York
For Plaintiff: Kristina S. Heuser, Esq., Kristina S. Heuser, P.C., Locust Valley, NY.
For Lord & Taylor LLC, Hudson's Bay Company (incorrectly sued as NRDC Equity Partners), Nicole Cintorian, Krita Downer, Janine Gruen, and Kyra Grill, Defendants: Roger H. Briton, Esq., Adam G. Guttell, Esq., Jackson Lewis LLP, Melville, NY.
LEONARD D. WEXLER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Lisa Young (" Young" or " Plaintiff" ) brings this action claiming violations
of the Americans with Disabilities Act (" ADA" ), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (" ADEA" ), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (" Title VII" ), and 42 U.S.C. § § 1981, 1985 and 1986. Defendants Lord & Taylor LLC, (" Lord & Taylor" ), NRDC Equity Partners Nicole Cintorino, Krista Downer, Janine Gruen, and Kyra Grill (collectively, the " Defendants" ) move to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (" Fed.R.Civ.P." ), Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. For the reasons that follow, Defendants' motion is granted in its entirety.
According to Plaintiff's complaint, she is a 77 year old black-Hispanic woman originating from Puerto Rico who suffers from carpel tunnel syndrome, inflammatory arthropathy and tenosynoritis, and who worked at Lord & Taylor for 15 years. Complaint (" Cmplt." ), ¶ 5. When Young first developed her symptoms nine years ago, she was moved to the watch department and worked there until January 2009, when she was assigned to the dress department. Cmplt., ¶ 19-20. Ms. Young claims that because of her disability, she had difficulty carrying the dresses, cleaning the dressing room, and performing other tasks as required. Cmplt., ¶ 23-34. When she explained to her manager Nicole Cintorino that she had difficulty carrying the dresses, etc., she was told, according to her -- facetiously -- to carry one dress at a time. Another time it was recommended she use a pole, and on yet another occasion, she was asked instead to put sensors on clothing, all of which she says were very difficult for her and worsened her symptoms. Cmplt., ¶ 23-34.
Thereafter, Plaintiff was told various complaints were lodged against her, including from customers (which Plaintiff found hard to believe), and she was warned that if another complaint was received, she would be fired. Cmplt., ¶ 40-46. A subsequent complaint did come in from another manager, and Plaintiff was terminated on March 5, 2009. Cmplt., ¶ 47-55.
On March 16,2009, Plaintiff filed a complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights (" NYSDHR" ) alleging unlawful discrimination because of her disability (the " NYSDHR Complaint" ). On September 30, 2010, NYSDHS issued a Determination and Order After Investigation (the " Order" ) finding that there was no probable cause that Plaintiff suffered discrimination due to disability in violation of New York law. The Order further noted that any potential claim under the ADA had to be pursued within 15 days with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (" EEOC" ). Plaintiff sought such a review. On October 20, 2010, the EEOC issued a Right to Sue letter (" EEOC letter" ), adopting the findings of the NYSDHR, and informing Plaintiff that any federal lawsuit had to be filed within ninety (90) days of receipt of the
notice. See EEOC letter, attached to complaint. Plaintiff filed this ...