Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

National Litigation Hotline

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
August 25, 2003

Adopting a broader definition of 'supervisor' than other Courts of Appeals have done for purposes of establishing an employer's vicarious liability in a sexual harassment suit, the Second Circuit recently held that a male employee who did not have authority to hire, fire, reassign, promote, or change the benefits of a female co-worker was nonetheless her supervisor for Title VII purposes. Mack v. Otis Elevator Co., 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 6948 (2d Cir. April 11).

Yasharay Mack started working for Otis Elevator Company in 1999 as an elevator mechanic's helper. In her position, she assisted six elevator mechanics. From the time of her hire, Mack claimed, mechanic James Connolly made lascivious comments regarding her appearance, regularly changed out of his uniform in front of her, and on at least one occasion, tried to force her to sit on his lap and kiss him. He also commented that 'spics' and 'niggers' were not meant to do elevator work. Mack repeatedly complained to Connolly's supervisor about him, but the company took no action. Mack ultimately filed suit in district court, alleging a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998) and Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998), an employer is vicariously liable for the harassment of an employee only when 'a 'supervisor with immediate (or successively higher) authority over the employee' has engaged in the complained of conduct.' ' The company argued that it should not be held liable for Connolly's harassment of Mack because Connolly was her co-worker, not her supervisor. The company noted that Connolly could not have hired or fired Mack, could not reassign her to different duties or significantly change her benefits, and had no power to promote her ' in other words, that he could not cause Mack to suffer an adverse employment action. The district court granted summary judgment to Otis Elevator.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
New York's Latest Cybersecurity Commitment Image

On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.

Law Firms are Reducing Redundant Real Estate by Bringing Support Services Back to the Office Image

A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.

The Bankruptcy Hotline Image

Recent cases of importance to your practice.

Bit Parts Image

Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights

How AI Has Affected PR Image

When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.