Eckhart v. Fox News Network, LLC

JENNIFER ECKHART, Plaintiff, v. FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC and ED HENRY, Defendants.

No. 20-CV-5593 (RA)

United States District Court, S.D. New York

September 9, 2021

OPINION & ORDER

RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge.

Plaintiff Jennifer Eckhart, a former Fox News employee, brings this action against the network and its former anchor, Ed Henry. She accuses Henry of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and rape. She alleges that Henry pursued her, sent her unsolicited and inappropriate text messages, and manipulated and coerced her into having a sexual relationship with him that was at times violent. On at least one occasion, Henry is alleged to have enticed Eckhart to his hotel room based on the false pretense that he would discuss and aid her career progression at Fox News, only to handcuff and violently rape her upon her arrival. She accuses Fox News of facilitating Henry's sexual misconduct by failing to take action as “complaints against [Henry] piled up, ” and of retaliating against her when she sought to hold both Henry and the network accountable for their conduct. Both Defendants deny all of Eckhart's allegations and have filed motions to dismiss this action. The motions are granted in part and denied in part.

Eckhart seeks to hold Henry liable under a host of legal theories. She asserts that he is liable for sex trafficking because she says he used empty promises of career advancement to defraud her into coming to his hotel room, then used force to cause her to have sexual intercourse with him. To be sure, this is not a conventional claim of sex trafficking. Eckhart has not alleged, for example, that Henry forced her into prostitution or sexual slavery. But because her allegations, which the Court must accept as true at this stage of the litigation comport with the relatively broad language of the applicable statute-which classifies as sex trafficking the use of “force [or] fraud . . . to cause [a] person to engage in a . . . sex act . . . on account of [some]thing of value”-the Court finds her claim for sex trafficking to be sufficiently pled. She also seeks to hold Henry liable for the alleged assaults under New York City's Gender Motivated Violence Act, and succeeds in stating a claim under that statute because of her plausible allegations that he acted with animus toward women. Eckhart further seeks to establish Henry's liability for gender discrimination, a term that includes sexual harassment and the creation of a hostile workplace. Considering the different standards for Eckhart's claims under the federal, New York State, and New York City antidiscrimination laws, Eckhart's discrimination and harassment claims against Henry under city law will proceed, while her claims under federal and state law must be dismissed.

Eckhart also brings claims against Henry for the retaliatory “harassment and trauma” to which he allegedly subjected her after she made public her claims against him. Among other things, she alleges that Henry-through his attorneys-posted nude photographs of her on the public docket in this case in an attempt to “victim shame” her. Because Eckhart plausibly alleges that this conduct was indeed intended to “shame” her, and because the Court finds that posting these photographs was not a reasonable litigation tactic, this claim survives, as does Eckhart's related claim against Henry for violation of New York's “revenge porn” law.

Eckhart also seeks to hold Fox News liable for Henry's conduct in several regards: first, for Henry's alleged “sex trafficking, ” which she claims the network benefitted from, and second, for Henry's sexual harassment, which she alleges created a hostile work environment. At this juncture, the Court concludes that Eckhart has plausibly alleged that the network knew or should have known about Henry's sexually harassing behavior but not necessarily the specific conduct that amounts to sex trafficking. Accordingly, Eckhart's claims against Fox News for harassment survive while her claim for sex trafficking does not. Eckhart's efforts to hold the network liable for Henry's dissemination of her photographs also fail for the reasons articulated below, although her claim that the network fired her in retaliation for complaining of Henry's abuse survives.

A more fulsome analysis of Eckhart's claims as well as a recitation of the factual allegations underlying them follows.

BACKGROUND

The Court draws the following facts from the Third Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”). Dkt. 113. For the purposes of this motion, the Court accepts all of Plaintiff's well-pled facts as true, as it must. See Kassner v. 2nd Ave. Delicatessen Inc., 496 F.3d 229, 237 (2d Cir. 2007).^[1]

I. The Parties

Defendant Ed Henry is a former on-air personality at Defendant Fox News, a national news network headquartered in New York, NY. Compl. ¶ 21. In 2014, Henry worked as the Chief White House Correspondent for the network. Id. ¶ 36. He later became the substitute host of “Fox &amp Friends Weekend” and a Chief National Correspondent. Id. ¶ 123. In December 2019, he was promoted to be the co-anchor of “America's Newsroom.” Id. ¶ 89. During his time at Fox News, he was based out of Washington, D.C. See id. ¶¶ 22, 36.

Plaintiff Jennifer Eckhart is a former producer at Fox News. After graduating from journalism school, Eckhart began working at Fox News in January 2013. Id. ¶ 23, 38. Her first position was as a freelance administrative assistant to Liz Claman, the anchor of “Countdown to the Closing Bell” on Fox Business Network. Id. ¶ 23. While working for Claman, Eckhart alleges that she, along with the other members of Claman's staff, suffered “incessant verbal, written and emotional abuse.” Id. ¶ 29; see also id. ¶¶ 25-29. Eckhart's manager, Brad Hirst, would order production staff “celebrat[ory]” lunch on the days Claman was absent, which Eckhart interpreted as an admission by Hirst that Claman committed “toxic abuse” against her employees, and that Hirst was aware of this abuse. Id. ¶ 29.

During the course of her seven-year tenure at Fox News, Eckhart received three promotions: from administrative assistant, to production assistant, to booker, to associate producer. Id. ¶¶ 30-31. She worked on a variety of programs, both behind the scenes and on air. Id. ¶ 32. Eckhart says that she received “substantial praise” for her work throughout her time at Fox News. Id. ¶ 33. During her time at Fox News, she was based out of New York. Id. ¶ 20.

II. The Parties' Relationship

In 2014, Henry followed Eckhart on Twitter and sent her a message saying “beautiful.” Compl. ¶¶ 36-37. Eckhart asserts she was “put off” by the message, but, given their relative statuses at the network-Henry was the Chief White House Correspondent Eckhart was a new hire who had recently graduated journalism school-she “felt compelled to respond.” Id. ¶ 38. Shortly thereafter, the two met in person, when Henry was appearing on a Fox News show based in New York and he invited Eckhart to meet him at the studio prior to his appearance. Id. ¶ 39. Henry later asked Eckhart out to drinks; when Eckhart declined, he sent her an email, calling her “[h]ard to get.” Id. ¶ 42. He then began sending Eckhart “unsolicited inappropriate, flirtatious and, at times sexually disturbing and graphic text messages.” Id. ¶ 43. Eckhart “play[ed] along” with Henry's messages, stating that she was “in fear of losing her job” if she did not. Id.

In early 2015, after several months of Henry asking, Eckhart agreed to meet for drinks. Id. ¶ 44.^[2]They met at the bar of the hotel at which Henry was staying. Id. ¶ 45. Henry then invited Eckhart to his room. Id. ¶ 48. Eckhart asserts that she did not want to go, but agreed because she “was fearful of the repercussions of refusing a request by one of the most powerful on-air figures at Fox News.” Id. Once in the hotel room, Henry began forcefully kissing Eckhart. Id. ¶ 49. “[F]earing that her career would be over if she refused Mr. Henry's sexual advances, ” Eckhart “relented to sexual intercourse with him against her will.” Id. Immediately after they had sexual intercourse, Henry offered to help Eckhart's career, and told her that he could “get her in a room with some really powerful people.” Id. ¶ 50. Eckhart and Henry did not see each other for several months after this. Id. ¶ 53.

In September 2015, when Henry was again in Fox News's New York offices, he sent her a message demanding she remove her underwear and put them in an envelope for him. Id. ¶ 54. Although she considered this request “extremely humiliating and disgusting, ” she complied, fearing retaliation if she did not. Id. ¶ 54. Later that day, Henry told Eckhart to meet him in the guest offices. Id. ¶ 55. When she arrived he pinned her to a wall, subjected her to forceful and unwanted kissing, and physically forced her to perform oral sex on him against her will. Id. ¶ 57. After this incident, Eckhart did not see Henry for over a year, although he continued to send her pornographic images, videos, and gifs during that time. Id. ¶ 58.

In early 2017, Henry's texts to Eckhart became even more degrading and suggestive of violence. In one message, he called her a “[g]entle little whore” and said she was going to “get tossed around like a little rag doll.” Id. ¶ 61. Shortly thereafter, Henry asked Eckhart to meet; when Eckhart declined, he again called her “[h]ard to get.” Id. ¶ 62. He then sent her a series of texts that read: “#obey” “[o]r” “#discipline.” Id. He also texted her “[o]wned & submissive.” Id. ¶ 63.

In February 2017, Henry asked Eckhart to meet at a New York restaurant for a drink. Id. ¶ 64. Because Henry had “explicitly told her that if she did not ‘obey' him, she would be ‘disciplined '” Eckhart states that she felt obligated to comply with...