On Monday, September 21st, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that a terminated in-house attorney plausibly alleged that she engaged in a protected activity when she refused to meet with her supervisor to discuss settling her pending harassment lawsuit.
In Newton v. LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton Inc., Newton filed a lawsuit in 2019 alleging that she was sexually harassed and assaulted at work. In 2022, LVMH terminated Newton’s employment, and Newton filed a federal retaliation claim, alleging two actions after July 2022 that she argued were protected activity: (i) her refusal to meet with her supervisor to discuss settlement of the 2019 lawsuit, and (ii) speaking out in a public forum and on social media to assert her right to be free from sex discrimination in the workplace.