Results
$30M+ recovered for workers.
Trial verdicts, appellate affirmations, and notable settlements representing New York employees in discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wrongful termination matters.
Over the course of more than a decade representing employees, Steven Fingerhut has recovered more than $30 million for workers — through jury verdicts, appellate affirmations, settlements, and agency hearings. The matters below are a representative selection.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Every case turns on its own facts.
Trial Verdicts & Appellate Results
-
$500,000+
January 2024
Smart v. USA Labor for Hire, Inc., et al.
Case No. 1:20-cv-5594 (E.D.N.Y.)
Federal jury verdict for a client subjected to a hostile work environment, retaliation, and defamation on the basis of sex and race, and terminated for objecting to harassment. With statutory attorneys' fees and accrued post-judgment interest, the judgment now exceeds $500,000. Steven defeated the defendants' motions for remittitur and a new trial and obtained a full attorneys'-fee award.
Race & Sex Discrimination · Retaliation · Defamation
-
Affirmed in Full
May 2025
Smart v. USA Labor for Hire, Inc., et al.
Case No. 24-1791 (2d Cir.)
On appeal from the federal verdict above, Steven prevailed on each of the six grounds the defendants asserted, securing an affirmed judgment from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Second Circuit · Appellate
-
$112,000
March 2022
Grant v. Pexie Enterprises, Inc.
Index No. 704041/2015 (Queens County Supreme Court)
Unanimous state jury verdict — under COVID-19 mask mandates throughout the proceedings — for a young woman of color sexually harassed, assaulted, and battered by her supervisor at a Subway franchise, and constructively discharged after fewer than two weeks of employment. The jury rejected the defendants' two counterclaims (abuse of process and fraud) on a 31-page verdict sheet.
Sexual Harassment · Assault & Battery · Constructive Discharge
-
Unanimous Liability Verdict + Attorneys' Fees
May 2017
Weng v. Fancy Lee Sushi Bar and Grill, Inc., et al.
Case No. 15-cv-5737 (ADS) (E.D.N.Y.)
Federal pregnancy discrimination verdict before the Honorable Arthur D. Spatt. A long-time waitress was pulled off the schedule and fired within days of telling her manager she was pregnant. The defense argued the termination was for her own benefit. The jury rejected that defense unanimously and imposed individual liability on the supervisor who fired her. The trial team obtained a prevailing-party attorneys'-fee award.
Pregnancy Discrimination · Title VII · NYSHRL
-
Recovery for Wrongfully Terminated Employee
May 2021
In Regard to Stacey E. Johnson
PFL Case No. 000009
One of New York State's earliest Paid Family Leave matters. Monetary compensation secured for a client wrongfully terminated from Vassar Brothers Medical Center while on approved leave caring for her infant son, who was undergoing emergency surgery. A separate race-retaliation claim resolved by settlement following the PFL ruling.
Paid Family Leave · Race Retaliation
Trial Settlements
-
Settled Mid-Trial — Day 3
September 27, 2021
Crump v. The New York City Housing Authority, et al.
Index No. 163138/2015 (New York County Supreme Court)
Sexual orientation discrimination and retaliation matter against NYCHA — one of the largest and most heavily-defended institutional employers in New York. After jury selection and through the start of plaintiff's direct testimony on the third day of trial, NYCHA agreed to settle. Visible readiness to take the case the full distance is itself what often causes institutional defendants to pay.
Sexual Orientation Discrimination · Retaliation
Motion Victories
-
Defaults Vacated Only on Condition Defense Pays Plaintiff's Costs
October 2023
Ruiz v. AF Trucking USA Inc., et al.
(S.D.N.Y.) — Hon. Cathy Seibel
Defense counsel did not respond when asked whether he would accept service of the complaint. After Steven paid for personal service and entered the defendants' defaults, counsel finally appeared and represented to the court that he had never heard from plaintiff's counsel before — a representation the record contradicted. At a show-cause hearing, the court vacated the defaults only on the condition that defense counsel personally pay the fees and costs the plaintiff had incurred in pursuing default judgment.
Default Judgment · Fee-Shifting
-
Motion to Dismiss Denied
November 2023
Roudabush v. Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University
Index No. 807857/2023E (Bronx County Supreme Court)
Closely contested application of New York's Adult Survivor Act (CPLR 214-j). The court held the alleged conduct could plausibly constitute 'forcible touching' of intimate parts under Penal Law § 130.52 and revived NYCHRL gender discrimination, hostile work environment, retaliation, and vicarious liability claims.
Adult Survivor Act · NYCHRL
-
Summary Judgment Denied in Full
June 2023
Kamal v. G E R Industries, Inc., et al.
Case No. 7:20-cv-05671-VB-VR (S.D.N.Y.)
Age discrimination case for an older worker pushed out of his job, against both the corporate employer and the individually named owner. ADEA cases require but-for causation and are routinely dismissed at summary judgment — this one survived in full, clearing the way for trial against both defendants.
Age Discrimination · ADEA
-
Summary Judgment Substantially Denied
March 2024
Ferrando-Dehtiar v. Anesthesia Group of Albany, P.C., et al.
Case No. 1:20-cv-01373 (AMN/CFH) (N.D.N.Y.)
Title VII and NYSHRL action against an anesthesiology practice and three physician-partners. After the client submitted a written resignation and the employer refused to allow her to rescind it, Steven persuaded the court that the refusal of rescission was itself the adverse action — sustaining retaliation, failure-to-promote, aiding-and-abetting, and assault & battery claims against the corporate and individual defendants.
Retaliation · Failure to Promote · Assault & Battery
-
Summary Judgment Denied
December 2022
Crowley v. Vintage Home Entertainment, Inc., et al.
Index No. 526211/2019 (Kings County Supreme Court)
Pregnancy discrimination matter where the employer told the state insurance carrier — falsely — that a sales director on approved Paid Family Leave had resigned, then pressured her to backdate a resignation letter. The court rejected the defense's 'innocent misunderstanding / cured by reinstatement offer' framing and found triable issues of fact. Case resolved by settlement.
Pregnancy Discrimination · PFL · NYSHRL
-
Rule 12(b) Motion Denied in Full
June 2023
Pradhan v. Maleen Banquet Hall and Mani Singh, Individually
Case No. 22-CV-3533 (AMD)(JMW) (E.D.N.Y.)
National-origin discrimination, hostile work environment, and assault action. A carefully-pled FLSA wage theory — built around the last two weeks of unpaid work that defeated the managerial exemption — preserved federal jurisdiction over the NYCHRL claims under supplemental jurisdiction. Judge Donnelly denied dismissal in full and kept the full claim structure in the Eastern District of New York.
National Origin · Hostile Work Environment · FLSA
Discovery Decisions
-
Subpoenas to Prior Employers Quashed
July 2021
Smith-Carrington v. Eli Lilly and Company, et al.
Case No. 1:20-cv-02377 (MKB)(CLP) (E.D.N.Y.)
Defendants noticed two subpoenas to plaintiff's former employers seeking application materials, performance reviews, attendance, discipline, and complaint history — arguing the records would establish a 'habit' of the same conduct that allegedly led to her termination. The court rejected the framing: prior-employer performance records were inadmissible propensity evidence rather than admissible 'habit' under Rule 406; the defense had no independent basis to expect responsive complaint records existed; and any narrowed inquiry was limited to specific named coworkers identified in a single exhibit. Years of unrelated employment history stayed out of the case.
Rule 45 · Rule 406 · Prior Employer Records
-
Defendant Ordered to Be Deposed First
March 2021
Kamal v. G E R Industries, Inc., et al.
Case No. 7:20-cv-05671-VB-VR (S.D.N.Y.)
Steven noticed the defendant's deposition early and pressed each notice as scheduling slipped. When the defendant moved to extend fact discovery and asked the court to require the plaintiff to be deposed first, Steven opposed. The court denied the extension and ordered the defendant himself to appear first — finding that although the Federal Rules do not provide a particular priority of depositions, the plaintiff's diligent efforts and the defendant's evident decision to make himself unavailable during the court-ordered fact-discovery period entitled the plaintiff to depose him first.
Deposition Priority · Discovery Schedule
-
Ex Parte Access to Former Supervisor Preserved
March 2019
Lozama v. Samaritan Daytop Village, Inc., et al.
Case No. 18-CV-4351 (DLI)(RML) (E.D.N.Y.)
Defense moved to bar further communication with a defendant's former supervisor — a key witness — on the theory that former employees whose conduct could be imputed to the corporation are 'parties' represented by company counsel under Rule 4.2. The court rejected the defense reading, applied the bright-line rule of Niesig v. Team I, and preserved direct access to former-employee witnesses across the Eastern District of New York.
Discovery · Witness Access · Rule 4.2
Notable Settlements
-
$2,000,000
Race discrimination settlement on behalf of eleven construction workers subjected to pervasive use of racial slurs by two supervisors.
-
$1,550,000
Sexual harassment settlement for a content producer harassed by the CEO of a B2B marketing company.
-
$975,000
Sexual harassment settlement for a bank employee harassed by her director-level supervisor.
-
$900,000
Sexual harassment settlement for an office manager who suffered severe sexual harassment.
-
$800,000
Age discrimination settlement for a C-suite executive terminated because of his age.
-
$800,000
Gender discrimination and wrongful termination settlement for a physician.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Every case turns on its own facts.
If your rights at work have been violated, do not wait.
Employment claims in New York have short deadlines — sometimes as short as 180 days. Contact Fingerhut Law for a free, confidential consultation.
Cases are typically handled on a contingency-fee basis — no fee unless the firm obtains a recovery.
Schedule a Consultation