New York State Assembly Bill A00501 represents a pivotal change in the state's approach to handling discrimination cases. Historically, the timeframe for raising claims under the New York State Human Rights Law was restricted - only 90 days for court proceedings against the government and a maximum of one year for bringing issues to the Division of Human Rights, with the sole exception of sexual harassment cases. The introduction of this bill, however, marks a significant shift, extending the statute of limitations to three years across the board for filings with the Division of Human Rights for claims against both private and public entities. This is biggest for education discrimination lawsuits that often were capped at a one year lookback period. 

Increased Access to Justice: The extension from one year to three years dramatically broadens the opportunity for individuals who have experienced discrimination to seek legal redress against the government. This is particularly crucial in cases where the complexity of the situation or the victims' circumstances might delay the decision to pursue legal action.

Benefit to School Discrimination Cases: The most notable impacts of this bill will be in the context of school systems. Previously, students or parents alleging discrimination had a mere year to initiate legal action. The extension to three years provides a more reasonable timeframe to prepare and pursue these important cases.

Click here to read Bill A00501.

Labor Law 201-g went into effect on October 9, 2018.

Did you know that Plaintiffs (sexual harassment victims) are suing companies for failing to comply with this mandatory training and disclosure law?

In December of 2018, New York County saw its first lawsuit alleging that a "Plaintiff was injured, in whole or in part, as a result of CIRE's failure to comply with NYC Admin Code § 8-107(29) and Labor Law § 201-g."

The case was about a "hostile, offensive, abusive and otherwise inappropriate work environment." 

Allegedly, this harassment included:

• Asking Plaintiff if he was single;
• Asking Plaintiff to go out with her for drinks and dinner, unrelated to business;
• Telling Plaintiff how handsome he and flirting with Plaintiff;
• Complimenting Plaintiff's choice of clothes;
• Telling Plaintiff he should have a girlfriend;
• Telling Plaintiff that having a girlfriend would afford him a health insurance entitlement, which "by the way I, Sarine have health insurance";
• Telling Plaintiff what color clothing he should be warning;
• Moving her desk next to Plaintiff's desk;
• Staring at Plaintiff at all hours of the day and commenting on his face or hair;
• Standing unnecessarily close to Plaintiff when speaking;
• Inappropriately attempting to give Plaintiff hugs and kisses;
• Demanding that Plaintiff "pinky swear" so that he not disclose something that occurred between Ms. Atamian and another employee, just so she could touch Plaintiff's hand;
• Unnecessarily interrupting Plaintiff's conversations with others;
• Demanding that Plaintiff open personal packages and mail in front of her;
• Requiring that Plaintiff make all requests for basic company information, documentation, etc., through her, where other brokers were permitted to engage in such activities on their own.
• Making inappropriate inquiries concerning what Plaintiff was doing, who he was with, etc. when he was not at the Office;" 

In fact, the Plaintiff argued that this violation of Labor Law  § 201-g  should result in Christie's International Real Estate Group, Inc. and two individual parties, paying "compensatory damages, punitive damages, statutory damages and special damages, as well as his costs, fees (including attorneys' fees) and disbursements, plus pre and post judgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, which amounts exceed the jurisdictional minimums of this Court"

Have you scheduled your annual training yet?

• Definition and scope of automated decision tools.
• Requirement for annual disparate impact analyses to assess potential discrimination.
• Mandate for transparency and public reporting of the analyses.
• Obligation for landlords to notify applicants when such tools are used.
• Empowerment of the Attorney General and Commissioner to investigate and act upon violations.

Legal analyst Andrew Lieb joins Newsmax to discuss Michael Cohen's involvement in the civil fraud case against Donald Trump. Lieb provides context on Cohen's role as Trump's former fixer and explains how Cohen clarified his statements about Trump's direction during cross examination and redirect on the witness stand.

On October 31, 2023, the NY AG Letitia James released a report detailing racial disparities in homeownership and financing throughout NY while calling to enhance the state's anti-discrimination law, the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL). 

The Report highlights that mortgage applicants of color are denied mortgages at nearly double the rate of white applicants, regardless of credit score, income, size of the loan, and other factors. Plus, they are more likely to be charged higher interest rates on their loans and less likely to be approved to refinance to lower rates. These higher costs total over $200 million extra to minorities. 

The Report calls for the strengthening the NYSHRL to explicitly cover disparate impact discrimination based on race, including increased enforcement against lenders. In fact, it has a 3 step plan:  

1. Obtain increased $$ for government agencies to conduct fair lending work.
2. Strengthen NYSHRL to prohibit lenders from engaging in discrimination any practice by requiring lenders to have a legitimate and nondiscriminatory justification for their actions. 
3. Passing Senate Bill 795 to prohibit unfair business practices. 

If you'd like to read more about the report click here.

On October 30th, 2023, President Biden issued an Executive Order (EO) addressing discrimination caused by artificial intelligence (AI), amongst other topics. 

The White House announced this EO in seeking to prevent AI from leading to and deepening discrimination, bias, and other issues in justice, healthcare, and housing. 

Now, agencies will be empowered to combat algorithmic discrimination, while enforcing existing authorities to protect anti-discrimination rights and safety. 

In summary, the Executive Order: 

• Calls for clear guidelines to keep AI algorithms from being used to exacerbate discrimination by landlords, Federal benefits programs, and Federal contractors.
• Tackles algorithmic discrimination through training, technical assistance, and coordinates with the Department of Justice and Federal civil rights offices for best practices to investigate and prosecute AI civil rights violations.
• Ensures fairness throughout the criminal justice system by developing best practices for the use of AI in sentencing, parole and probation, pretrial release and detention, risk assessments, surveillance, crime forecasting and predictive policing, and forensic analysis.

The Biden Administration Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights sets out steps those using AI can take to ensure fairness and equality. The steps include regularly checking for and addressing any biases in the design and use of AI systems, using diverse and representative data to avoid discrimination or unfair impacts, ensuring accessibility for people with disabilities during the design and development of AI systems, conducting tests to identify and address any disparities before and after the AI system is in use, providing clear oversight from organizations to ensure fairness, and conducting independent evaluations and sharing easy-to-understand reports, including test results and how any issues are being addressed, to ensure these protective measures are in place.

If companies fail to comply and use AI incorrectly to deepen discrimination and bias, this Executive Order will become the basis for discrimination lawsuits as a result of the incorrect use.

To learn more about the Executive Order click here. To read the Biden Administration Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights click here. 

On October 25th, 2023 Governor Hochul signed A1153A to amend New York State's Banking Laws to protect against unregistered and unlicensed mortgage brokers. 

This amendment prohibits mortgage lenders from conducting business with any individual or entity which it knows or should have known is acting as a mortgage banker or a mortgage broker without being licensed or registered with New York State's Department of Financial Services (DFS). This amendment exempts entities who provide mezzanine mortgages.

This amendment also requires a mortgage banker, mortgage broker or entities who provide mezzanine mortgages to notify DFS of any mortgage banker or a mortgage broker acting without being licensed or registered.

If non-exempt unlicensed or unregistered mortgage banker or a mortgage broker engages in unauthorized activities after DFS issues a cease-and desist notice, then that non-exempt unlicensed or unregistered mortgage banker or a mortgage broker is liable for the actual damages equivalent to the amount of money paid to the person affected.

This amendment goes into effect November 7th, 2023, which is the 13th days after it became a law. Click here to read the law.