D'Amico v. Commodities Exchange, Inc.
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; January 22, 1997; New York; State Appellate Court
The Supreme Court of New York County, under Justice Emily Jane Goodman, issued an order on April 25, 1996, which affirmed the denial of the defendants' motion for partial summary judgment regarding the plaintiff's claim under Executive Law § 296. The plaintiff, alleging membership in the Commodities Exchange, Inc. (COMEX), contended that male members of the trading floor displayed abusive behavior towards her and other women, physically pushing and intimidating them, which hindered her career and caused emotional distress, including financial losses associated with her COMEX seat. Defendants argued that the plaintiff had no valid claim under Executive Law § 296, asserting she was not an employee and that COMEX did not qualify as a public accommodation. The court rejected these arguments, stating it was unnecessary to determine the plaintiff's employment status since her claim did not rest on employment discrimination under § 296(1)(a). The court recognized the trading floor as a public accommodation under § 296(2)(a), noting that it serves commodities trading under federal law and is essential for individuals pursuing careers in that field. The ruling emphasized that accepting the defendants' position could allow COMEX to discriminate against individuals, thus undermining protections under the Human Rights Law. Citing legal precedents, the court affirmed that the definitions in the statute should be interpreted liberally to protect equal opportunities for all individuals and that COMEX's trading floor, which provides public services without restrictive membership limits, qualifies as a public accommodation. Additionally, the court reaffirmed that individuals could be held liable for aiding and abetting discriminatory conduct under Executive Law § 296(6) and (7). The decision was unanimously affirmed by the judges, with costs awarded.