Published on:

Plaintiff Sues Employer for Sexual Offenses

The complainants filed an action that alleges forty-six allegations of fact in support of three causes of action. Their first two causes of action claims include sexual assault by the creation of a hostile work environment and the constructive discharge. The third cause of action is for intentional infliction of emotional distress. A New York Criminal Lawyer said all of the complainants seek for a decision without trial on liability on the entire complaint.

The complaint alleges that the complainants were working at the clinic when they discovered that the doctor had installed and used a hidden camera in the only working restroom.

Consequently, a New York Criminal Lawyer said one of the complainant’s asserts thirty-eight allegations of fact in support of five causes of action. The first two causes of action claim consist of sexual assault by the creation of a hostile work environment, for intentional discrimination and constructive discharge. The third cause of action is for violation of the right to privacy. The fourth cause of action is for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The fifth is for tort. The said complainant seeks to have decision without trial on liability on the first, second and fourth reasons of action. She asserts that she was a medical office clerk at the clinic and at some point the doctor placed an air purifier containing a hidden surveillance camera in the employee’s bathroom positioned five feet away from and at the same height of the toilet seat. She further states that she used the bathroom at least twice a day. When she discovered the unlawful surveillance equipment and the placement of the monitor in the doctor’s office, she resigned.

The complainant’s joint motion papers consist of an attorney’s affirmation and seven annexed exhibits. Based on records, the exhibit 1 is the complainant’s summons and verified complaint. The exhibit 2 is the doctor’s verified answer to the verified complaint. A New York Sex Crimes Lawyer said the exhibit 3 is a district court felony criminal complaint against the doctor. The exhibit 4 is a certificate of disposition of charges. The exhibit 5 is a certified transcript of the sentencing of criminal doctor for the crime of unlawful surveillance in the second degree and a violation of penal law. The exhibit A is the summons and complaint of the other complainant’s action and exhibit B is the doctor’s answer in the lawsuit action.

The doctor oppose the motion with an attorney’s affirmation, a memorandum of law, and a certified copy of the transcripts of the doctor’s bench trial under the charges for the crime of unlawful surveillance in the second degree.

The complainants had replied with a memorandum of law. Based on records, the executive law states that it shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer or licensing agency, because of an individual’s age, race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, marital status, or domestic violence victim status, to refuse to hire or employ or to bar or to discharge from employment such individual or to discriminate against such individual in compensation or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment.

A hostile work environment exists when there is conduct severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive, and it must allege that the victim subjectively perceived the environment to be hostile.

The doctor admitted in paragraph five of the answer to the complaint that the complainants worked for them however there is no allegation of fact by anyone indicating that any of the complainants were employees of at the time the hidden camera was installed. Furthermore, a New York Drug Possession Lawyer said there is no allegation of facts by anyone with personal knowledge that any of the complainants suffered any embarrassment or mental anguish as a result of discovering the hidden camera or that any of them resigned upon discovery of same. In addition, the complainants have not provided the court with an affidavit or sworn testimony by anyone with personal knowledge to any fact alleged in their unverified complaint.

The doctor alleges in their attorney’s affirmation that although a surveillance camera was illegally installed, there is no evidence that it was actually used. They attach the transcript of the doctor’s criminal trial in an effort to support the contention and to resist the complainant’s motion.

The doctor did not raise any other issue in their opposition papers. Therefore, the doctor did not show the existence of material issues of fact. The complainant’s motion to restore the action to the active trial calendar is granted as unopposed.

The other complainant’s motion for decision without trial on liability on their complaint is denied without prejudice .However, the motion of other complainant for decision without trial on liability on the first, second and fourth cause of action against the doctor and the hospital is granted.

If you feel the anger as well as embarrassment because someone captured a video or photos of your personal activities, you can consult with the New York Sex Crime Attorneys for you to discuss thorough your rights and legal options. In some way, if you wish to have the Kings Criminal Lawyers at Stephen Bilkis and Associates, the team will definitely impart you and your family what you deserve.

Contact Information