Judge Finds for Employer Who Fired 'Cute' Woman

, New York Law Journal

   | 4 Comments

Even under New York's liberal employment discrimination laws, a woman fired for being "too cute" does not have a claim for gender discrimination, a Manhattan judge has ruled.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • DVT

    seems hard to believe the wife/co-owner would have applied the same standard to a male employee.

  • The Manager

    Don‘t hate me because I‘m beautiful?

  • Matthew Siegel

    And what about if she was too ugly! I do not see how one classification is any more or less discriminatory than the other, since both relate to the plaintiff‘s physical attributes as a woman!

  • Honest Iago

    Justice Hagler writes, "Plaintiff has failed to plead in the Amended Complaint in sufficient detail what the term "too cute" is alleged to mean. The reference to the term "too cute" may not be a remark about physical appearance in the first place." Surely you jest! Isn‘t there precedent from Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart? "I know it when I see it."

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202758085474

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.