In a significant development, a Florida federal judge has rejected a bid to dismiss a discrimination lawsuit brought by a former employee of the Office of the State Attorney, Ariana R. Menendez. Menendez has alleged that she was subjected to discrimination and denied accommodations while pregnant. Notably, the judge emphasized that the claim of her employment termination itself constitutes a substantial basis for alleging an adverse employment action.
Judge Refuses to Grant Dismissal
U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Corrigan issued the order denying the dismissal bid by the Office of the State Attorney for the Fourth Judicial Circuit. The lawsuit stems from Menendez’s termination in September 2021, after she reported enduring harassment and discriminatory treatment upon revealing her pregnancy to her employers.
Contentions of the State Attorney’s Office
The state attorney’s office had contended that Menendez’s suit lacked the basis for relief. However, Judge Corrigan found Menendez’s allegations sufficient to assert plausible claims for sex and pregnancy discrimination, as well as retaliation, in violation of Title VII and the Florida Civil Rights Act. The judge clarified that Menendez’s claims met the adverse employment action requirement, which was the only element challenged by the State Attorney’s Office.
A Pivotal Moment in the Discrimination Suit
Menendez’s lawsuit, initiated in December, accuses the state attorney’s office of discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act amendment, and the Florida Civil Rights Act. According to her complaint, Menendez, employed by the state attorney’s office from March 2020 to September 2021, was a full-time executive assistant.
A Tale of Discrimination Unfolded
Menendez’s ordeal began in November 2020 when she revealed her pregnancy to her boss. Subsequently, she alleges that her treatment took a detrimental turn, marked by discriminatory behavior, invasive questioning regarding her pregnancy, and unwarranted demands, including her physical presence in the office during the pandemic. Her complaints to her supervisor and requests for accommodations went unanswered.
