Sivio v. Vill. Care Max, 18 Civ. 2408 (GBD) (GWG)
| Decision Date | 31 January 2020 |
| Docket Number | 18 Civ. 2408 (GBD) (GWG) |
| Citation | 436 F.Supp.3d 778 |
| Parties | Enza H. SIVIO, Plaintiff, v. VILLAGE CARE MAX, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Donna H. Clancy, The Clancy Law Firm, New York, NY, for Plaintiff.
Eric Douglas Witkin, Houston Adams Stokes, Rebecca Ann Goldstein, Samantha E. Beltre, Littler Mendelson, P.C., New York, NY, for Defendant.
Plaintiff Enza H. Sivio brings this suit against her former employer, Village Care Max ("VCM"), asserting claims related to her employment at VCM. Specifically, Sivio asserts claims under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 - 796 ("RA"); the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 12213 ("ADA"); New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 290 to 297 ("NYSHRL"); and New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y. City Admin. Code §§ 8-101 to 131 ("NYCHRL"). Before the court is VCM's motion for summary judgment.1 For the reasons that follow VCM's motion is granted as to Sivio's retaliation claims, but denied as to the other claims.
We next recount the facts pertinent to the defendant's motion. These facts are either undisputed, unless otherwise noted, or represent plaintiff's version of the relevant facts as supported by competent evidence.2
Defendant VCM is a non-profit organization that cares for seniors and other individuals with chronic healthcare needs. See Leacock I Decl. ¶ 2; Langaigne Decl. ¶ 2; White Decl. ¶ 2. VCM provides long-term care to customers, who are referred to as "members," by coordinating and assisting these members with various types of treatment, programs, and care. Leacock I Decl. ¶ 3; Langaigne Decl. ¶ 3; White Decl. ¶ 3. VCM has a care management department, including a director of care management, care management supervisors, care managers, care coordinators, and nurse assessors. See White Dep. (annexed as Ex. B to Witkin Decl.) (Docket # 52-2) 56:10-59:04. Plaintiff Sivio was employed as a care manager at VCM from April 10, 2017 to November 9, 2017. New Employee Onboarding Checklist, dated April 10, 2017 (annexed as Ex. 3 to Leacock I Decl.) (Docket # 53-3); Email from White to Sivio, dated Nov. 9 2017 (annexed as Ex. 10 to White Decl.) (Docket # 54-10).
The parties dispute the job responsibilities of a care manager. See Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 4. VCM asserts the responsibilities of care managers "included home visits to assess the patient (member), documentation of patient visits, and follow-up calls." See Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 4; Leacock Decl. ¶ 4; White Dep. 62:3-62:8; 64:24-65:4. Sivio states she was offered a position as a "telephonic nurse care manager," which was a type of care manager that conducts telephonic assessment of members but does not perform home visits or other field assessments. See Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 4; Sivio Dep. 41:17-47:14; id. 57:11-58:3; Clickner Dep. (annexed as Ex. C to Clancy Decl.) (Docket # 60-3) 103:14-24.
The care manager job description contained in the application that Sivio digitally signed on March 9, 2017, explains that "assessments will be conducted in the member's home or telephonic" and that one of the job requirements was travel within New York City. See Application, filed on Aug. 14, 2019 (annexed as Ex. 1 to Leacock I Decl.) (Docket # 53-1) at 4.3 During orientation for her new position on April 10, 2017, Sivio was presented with a job description, which VCM asked her to sign. Leacock I Decl. ¶ 10. That description stated "some portions (less than 50%) of daily assignments require travel to Client/resident/patient locations or other work sites" Position Summary, filed on Aug. 14, 2019 (annexed as Ex. 4 to Leacock 1 Decl.) (Docket # 53-4). Sivio voiced concern that she would not be able to travel to client locations because of her allergies, Sivio Dep. 102:13-18, but was told by VCM orientation staff that it was "not an issue" and that she didn't "have to worry about it," id. 103:3-10. Later, as part of her orientation, Sivio "satisfactorily" conducted a home visit assessment on May 9, 2017. Id. 117:12-124:45; 25:24-130:3.
The parties dispute how often Sivio performed home visits once she began her job as a care manager. See Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 30. Sivio asserts care managers spent the majority of their day making phone calls, rather than performing home visits. Clickner Dep. 54:23-55:13. VCM contends that Sivio was required to perform home visits regularly. Leacock I Decl. Exs. 5-10, filed on Aug. 14, 2019 (Dockets ## 53-5 through 53-10).
Care managers such as Sivio were overseen by "care manager supervisors." See Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 12. Sivio was managed by two supervisors: Michelle Clickner and Donna Langaigne. Id. ¶¶ 9-11. Care manager supervisors such as Clickner and Langaigne were required to, inter alia, complete randomized audits of the care managers they supervised. See Langaigne Decl. ¶ 8; Clickner Dep. 78:18-78:20; id. 95:24-96:4.4 If the supervisors' audit revealed that a care manager was not following VCM procedures or rules, the care manager could be subject to discipline, such as placement on a performance improvement plan. See Langaigne Decl. ¶ 9. Additionally, if an audit revealed non-compliance with procedures or rules, the care manager could be subject to more frequent audits in the future, at the discretion of the supervisor. Langaigne Decl. ¶ 10. Poor audit results could also cause care managers to be required to work out of VCM's home office, where they could presumably be more closely supervised. White Dep. 60:17-60:19.
Sivio suffers from pet allergies and asthma
. See Drullinsky Medical Note, filed on Sept. 30, 2019 (annexed as Ex. F to Clancy Decl.) (Docket # 60-6). When she is exposed to asthma triggers such as pets, "she can have severe exacerbation of her asthma that may require hospitalization." Id. Prior to her employment at VCM, Sivio treated her asthma using solely an albuterol inhaler. Sivio Dep. 67:19-68:18. However, after exposure to pets during home visits for VCM members, Sivio began a more extensive treatment plan that includes multiple medications and allergen immunotherapy. Sivio Dep. 244:10-247:8.
While employed as a care manager at VCM, Sivio made home visits to members who had pets. Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 32. After making visits to homes with pets, Sivio experienced acute asthma
attacks, became itchy, and began to wheeze. Id. To respond to these attacks, Sivio took Prednisone, Advair, Singular, Ventolin, and used a nebulizer. Id. ¶ 33. On July 28, 2017, Langaigne emailed Michelle Clickner, another one of Sivio's supervisors, stating that Sivio had "notified [her] that she has allergies to pets and is unable to make visits to members who have pets." Id. ¶ 35. Langaigne asked Clicker if they could "discuss possible plans on how to proceed with this?" Id. That same day, Langaigne met with VCM's Vice President of Human Resources, Pam White, to discuss Sivio's alleged inability to visits members who have pets and what accommodations would be possible. White Dep. 137:23-138:2, 140:9-140:19. On August 24, 2017, Sivio told her supervisors that she could not enter homes with pets, and asked that her clients with pets be reassigned to other case managers. Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 45. Sivio subsequently provided a letter from her doctor on August 31, 2017, which indicated she suffers from severe asthma and multiple allergies including pets. Witkin Decl. Ex. G.
A medical assessment of Sivio's requested accommodation was conducted by CareWorks, a third-party leave administrator that reviews medical documentation of employees who request leave or accommodations. Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 47. On September 1, 2017, a nurse from CareWorks e-mailed Sivio a medical form to complete within 15 days so that CareWorks could assess Sivio's requested accommodation. Id. ¶ 48. Sivio did not provide the medical documentation to CareWorks, but she did provide the requested medical information to VCM's human resources department. White Decl. ¶ 9; id. Ex. 2.
Later in September, VCM's human resources team had a conversation to discuss the possibility of screening members for pets but came to the conclusion it was not possible to include information about pets in their assessment of members. Def. Reply to Pl. 56.1 Statement ¶ 50. On September 26, 2017, Sivio had a meeting with her supervisors, human resources Vice President Pam White, and another human resources representative, Juan Pichardo. Id. ¶ 54. During this meeting, White told Sivio that VCM could not grant her request that she only be assigned to home visits with members who did not have pets. Id. ¶ 56. White stated the request could not be granted because VCM did not categorize members by whether or not they had pets. Id. ¶ 57. Instead, White explained, members are assigned to care managers based on the language they speak and the location of the member's home. Id. ¶ 58. White also stated that VCM's purpose is to service their members, and "pets are not a main function of what they do." Id. ¶ 59. White suggested that Sivio meet with her doctor again to explore possible treatment or accommodations for her asthma
. Id. ¶ 60. Sivio was instructed to follow up with White by October 9, 2017 regarding her medication condition. Id. ¶ 61. If Sivio did not follow up with White, the parties agreed White would assume Sivio no longer needed an accommodation and the issue would be considered resolved. Id. The parties further agreed that Sivio had until October 9, 2017 to inform White if she needed more time to consult with a doctor. Id. ¶ 62. White explained that VCM's position was that Sivio had already requested an accommodation that she not be required to go to the homes of members with pets, that request was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v. MTA Bus Co.
...then a claim brought pursuant to the “broader” provisions of the NYCHRL “necessarily also survives summary judgment.” Sivio, 436 F.Supp.3d at 796 n.11 (citing Makinen, 30 N.Y.3d at 89, 86 N.E.3d at 802; see Mihalik, 715 F.3d at 109. Accordingly, and for the reasons discussed supra Section I......
-
Dodd v. City Univ. of N.Y.
...evidence that" discrimination "played even a partial motivating role in the decision to terminate" plaintiff); Sivio v. Vill. Care Max , 436 F. Supp. 3d 778, 802 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (same and collecting cases). 9. Occhiogrosso Dodd argues that Occhiogrosso engaged in retaliation against Dodd wh......
-
Wein v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.
...retaliation," it alone "is insufficient to satisfy [Wein's] burden to bring forward some evidence of pretext." Sivio v. Vill. Care Max, 436 F. Supp. 3d 778, 801-02 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (quoting El Sayed v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 627 F.3d 931, 933 (2d Cir. 2010)). This alone supports the grant of s......
-
Davis v. Power Auth. of New York
... ... Paperwork”) (Dkt. No. 92-18); Riolo Decl. Ex. S ... (“Pl.'s 2017 FMLA ... law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a); see also Psihoyos v. John ... law.” Royal Crown Day Care LLC v. Dep't of ... Health & Mental Hygiene ... Queens ... Vill. Comm. for Mental Health for Jamaica Cmty ... 792 ... (1973), applies. See Sivio v. Vill. Care Max , 436 ... F.Supp.3d 778, ... ...
-
Employer Responses
...imposed by having to determine the pet ownership of clients, let alone explain why that hardship was undue. Sivio v. Vill. Care Max , 436 F. Supp. 3d 778 (S.D.N.Y. 2020). Sixth Circuit Plaintiff with PTSD sought the accommodation of not having to work on a dredge on the Mississippi River, a......