Can a guy sue for sexual harassment?
I haven't read Archie comics in years, but as a kid, I loved the Riverdale gang.
America's typical teenagers. So clean! So wholesome!
Well, that's the fiction. Real life at Archie Comics Productions of Mamaroneck, New York, seems to be more like this 1954 MAD satire of Archie (WARNING: violent, criminal, and sexual innuendo that may be offensive to some readers).
The original creators of the strip have long since passed away, and a significant part of the control of Archie Comics is left with Nancy Silberkleit, the widow of the son of one of the creators. Since she is a widow, and named "Nancy," you have probably correctly deduced that Ms. Silberkleit is a female.
Back in the summer of 2011, when Ms. Silberkleit was co-CEO with Jonathan Goldwater (the son of another of the original creators), the company filed a lawsuit against Ms. Silberkleit seeking to prevent her from attending a comics convention because of some bizarre alleged behavior on her part. The company's request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against Ms. Silberkleit was granted.
Then in early 2012, Mr. Goldwater sued to have Ms. Silberkleit removed as co-CEO, but eventually the parties reached some type of agreement.
(I am greatly oversimplifying the convoluted history of this dispute, which involves many lawsuits filed by and against Ms. Silberkleit, but you need for me to get to the point because you don't have all day.)
A couple of months ago, several Archie Comics employees (including executives but not Mr. Goldwater) filed yet another lawsuit against Ms. Silberkleit seeking $25MM plus $7.5MM in punitive damages for gender discrimination or harassment under the New York State Human Rights Law, retaliation under the same law, tortious interference with economic relations, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
To say that the 2013 lawsuit is not well drafted is an understatement. It goes on and on and on, and skips to and fro, and when you finish reading it, you still aren't sure exactly what they're suing about except that they can't stand Ms. Silberkleit.
"I've read that crazy lawsuit five or six times, and I still can't make head or tail out of it!"
Be that as it may. One of the allegations is that in a business meeting (apparently several years ago), Ms. Silberkleit pointed to every male in the room and referred to each man by the name of the male sexual organ. (At least she did use the anatomically correct name - no slang for Ms. Silberkleit.) Allegedly on other occasions, too, she referred to men by this anatomical name instead of their given names.
Last month, Ms. Silberkleit's attorney filed a motion to dismiss the latest lawsuit and, in a much-better-written brief, blasted the suit as being full of untimely and scurrilous allegations (including things Ms. Silberkleit had allegedly done as far back as 1989, when she was not even affiliated with Archie Comics). He's also seeking sanctions, contending that the lawsuit is frivolous and was filed just to humiliate Ms. Silberkleit.
But the attorney made one statement that caught a lot of attention this week -- he said that the male plaintiffs could not claim gender discrimination or harassment under the New York law because it was undisputed that they were white males and therefore were not members of a "protected class" under the New York law. (Not sure what being white has to do with this, but anyway . . .)
This statement created somewhat of an internet furor. Commenters and some bloggers, including at least one men's rights group (I didn't link to their site because of some graphic sexual comments), have said that this just goes to show how unfair the anti-discrimination laws are, and how biased against males.
So. Is Ms. Silberkleit's attorney correct?
No. HECK, NO.
I do not know where Ms. Silberkleit's attorney got the idea that the New York law does not protect men from sexual harassment or discrimination. But it does. The law prohibits discrimination (harassment is considered a form of discrimination) based on "sex." It doesn't say the victim has to be a female. And in their response to Ms. Silberkleit's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, the plaintiffs actually cited to a few court decisions from New York specifically saying that men as well as women are protected by the law. (Ms. Silberkleit's attorney didn't cite any law related to this issue.)
The plaintiffs' harassment and retaliation claims seem to have a lot of problems. The main one that jumps out at me is that Ms. Silberkleit allegedly said these very inappropriate things before July 2011 because this was all discussed in detail in the 2011 lawsuit seeking to keep Ms. Silberkleit out of the comics convention. According to the New York State Division of Human Rights Rules of Practice (scroll down to 465.3(e)), a party has one year from the date of the last discriminatory act to file a complaint. But the plaintiffs admit in their lawsuit that, at least as of September 2013, they had never filed a discrimination complaint. That could totally defeat their claims be problematic.
But the main point I want to make is that men, as well as women, ARE protected under the law from sex discrimination and sexual harassment. This is true for New York law and federal law. Ms. Silberkleit's lawyer is just wrong.
By the way, Ms. Silberkleit has a reply brief due today. We will keep you informed of all developments in this saga of dysfunction and litigiousness.
If you find the story of Archie Comics as interesting as I do, here are some links so you can read more:
An October 2013 article from the New York Post.
An October 2013 article on the Comic Book Resources website.
An October 2013 article from the Mamaroneck, NY, newspaper (copied and pasted on a comic collector discussion board).
(Articles from this past week about the latest developments are linked in the blog post, above.)
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010