Roy M. Victor v. State of New Jersey, New Jersey State Police, et al., June 2009,401 N.J. Super. 596

The Appellate Division held that a plaintiff must prove that he or she suffered from an adverse employment action when an accommodation for a disability is denied.

Mathirampuzha v. Potter, 548 F.3d 70 (2d Cir. 2008)

In Mathirampuzha, the Second Circuit held that an employer was entitled to summary judgment with respect to employment discrimination claims raised against it because, in part, the physical assault allegedly suffered by the plaintiff at the hands of a supervisor did not amount to an “adverse employment action.” Additionally, the Court held that the plaintiff’s retaliation and hostile work environment claims were barred due to his failure to seek administrative remedies, because these claims were not reasonably related to his administrative complaint arising from the physical assault. Finally, the Court held that the Secretary of Labor, and not the courts, have exclusive, unreviewable authority to determine the scope of coverage under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (“FECA”).

Wood v. Pittsford Central School District, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 24733 (2d Cir. Dec. 8, 2008).

In Wood v. Pittsford Central School District, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s judgment granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants, based, in part, on evidence that they had intentionally destroyed employee records in apparent violation of EEOC regulations. The Court noted that this was sufficient to permit a spoliation inference and to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the defendants’ proffered reason for the employee’s termination was, in fact, a pretext.