Anne Burrell et al Sued…

December 4th, 2009 by Dick Johnson



Chef Anne Burrell et al Sued for Discrimination…

PX This has recently obtained the official Supreme Court docket (Index No. 108471-2008 Filed: March 23, 2009) for Susan Kendall Bradford, Jennifer Sue Lim, and Sarra Hennigan VS Anne Burrell, Centro Vinoteca, Sasha Muniak, and George Elkins alleging that the plaintiffs were subject to "discrimination" and "retaliation" in violation of the Human Rights Law. Among the plaintiffs complaints are the accusations that (former Centro Vinoteca chef) Anne Burell subjected the plaintiffs to persistent ridicule and disparagement, at times calling the plaintiffs (all formerly employed by Centro Vinoteca) such derogatory terms as "slutty," "saggy," "ho," "whore," and "stupid dumb whore… idiot." The plaintiffs also assert Burell persistently addressed them mockingly, commenting on their "cleavage," and "harassing" them with such offensive remarks as, "have you fucked that [co-worker] yet?" The plaintiffs further allege they were wrongfully terminated in "retaliation" for their "complaints" about Burrell.

The lawsuit charges that Elkins and Muniak were aware of these circumstances but failed to address the situation in a manner consistent with the NY State Human Rights Law.
According to the docket, the defendants Elkins and Muniak sought to dismiss these claims "as asserted by all plaintiffs, and as asserted by Hennigan against Burrell, …the Complaint is devoid of any allegation against either Muniak or Elkins or of any actionable comments made by Burrell."

"Additionally, plaintiffs have failed to adequately allege that they suffered adverse employment actions by Muniak and Elkins. As to the remaining allegations which do not involve Burrell, such allegations do not identify (1) who allegedly told Bradford to dress nicely for New Years’ Eve, (2) the manager who allegedly told Lim and Bradford to work during brunch, (3) who allegedly replaced Lim after she left for a few days when her mother passed away, (4) who fired Bradford and gave Bradford’s shifts to the new bartender, (5) who allegedly fired Lim, told her she was being suspended, or which manager never returned her calls, or (6) who allegedly terminated each of them Bradford or Lim, or constructively terminated Hennigan. And,to the extent my of the above-allegations constitute adverse employment actjons, plaintiffs have failed to allege individual liability against Muniak or Elkins under New York law. Their names a re absent from all such allegations, and plaintiffs do not specifically allege that Muniak or Elkins were personally involved in any of said conduct. In addition, those allegations made ‘collectively’ against defendants are similarly insufficient. Thus, plaintiffs failed to state causes of action against Muniak and Elkins."

The Supreme Court, however, disagreed and found, "the Complaint sufficiently alleges Muniak’s, Elkin’s and Burrell’s alleged managerial roles at Centro, their ability to hire and fire plaintiffs, their failures to sufficiently investigate the complaints made against Burrell, and the ultimate termination of Lim and Bradford, and constructive termination of Hennigan." Furthermore, "…plaintiffs’ complaint sufficiently alleges that defendants terminated or constructively terminated the plaintiffs after defendants received complaints concerning Burrell’s alleged discriminatory conduct."

As it currently stands, "dismissal… is denied." The case is presently ongoing.



For more information on Anne Burrell, read PX Me – The Sequel to PX This.


Tags: , , , , , , ,

Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /homepages/23/d250522760/htdocs/PXthisToo/wp-includes/class-wp-comment-query.php on line 405

24 Responses to “Anne Burrell et al Sued…”

  1. Huh? Says:

    What I don’t understand is how Centro can still be liable if they fired Anne Burell. Wouldn’t that prove that they did properly address the situation? Burrell was fired long before this suit was filed.

  2. Vanilla Ice Says:


  3. inkslinger Says:

  4. inkslinger Says:

  5. MILFweed Says:

    I agree with Vanilla Ice. Except I don’t understand why Abbe has to speak hypothetically. Is that a legal thing?

  6. Dishwasher Says:

    Don’t know if it’s a legal thing but it’s always better to be safe than sorry! But it def does make it easier to understand. lol ;) Centro did the right thing. Even if they are found innocent there could have been mounting legals fees alone.

  7. inkslinger Says:

  8. inkslinger Says:

  9. inkslinger Says:

  10. Mark M. Says:

    The same thing happened to a friend of mine. As the owner he was only named in the lawsuit because he was the only one with any money. The other defendants wouldn’t be able to pay anyway even if they lost. It’s not worth it to the lawyers to win a case if they have nothing to collect in the end. They are most likely not being paid so they only get money if they win the case. He ended up winning but he still had to spend a lot of money on lawyers to defend himself. That’s usually what the lawyers want. They hope that the owners settle to avoid paying the mounting legal fees even if they don’t have a strong case. They just keep it going in the court system until the defendants get fed up and settle.

  11. Dick Johnson Says:

    Hey Mark M.

    Thanks for your input. Yup, I think that’s the point Abbe was trying to make in our “interview.”

    Of course, she uses a… umm… euphemism…


  12. Ha! Says:

    Anne supposedly just got a $500K cookbook deal. Good thing, now she can afford to pay off her own lawsuit! Ha!

  13. Capt K Says:

    “It may be a while longer before we see Anne Burrell back in a New York City kitchen”

    Sure. That’s the reason. It has nothing to do with no one wanting to hire her. lol

  14. Ha! Says:

    Exactly! It’s been over a year since she had a job, this cookbook thing only came along now.

  15. Dick Johnson Says:

    Maybe the cookbook is supposed to be kind of ironic like “The Worst Cooks in America,” and it will be called “Cooking Tips From a Chef Who Can’t Get a Job”!


  16. Dick Johnson Says:

    But yeah, wasn’t she in the press 6 months ago saying that she needed a job? I guess there weren’t any takers.

  17. Mia Says:

    Sarra Hennigan is a disgusting old pig, after young guys off the market.

  18. mikea Says:

    anne needs sex,bottom line!

  19. LOL Says:

    Just wanted to drop by and say that I read PX Me,, loved it. Read it in 2 days!

    So “Spikey” is Anne ! Lol

    Had no idea about any of that, keep up the good work! :D

  20. abbe Says:

    thank you, “LOL” :)

    so glad you enjoyed it!

  21. LOL Says:

    Hey Abbe it’s me again, jsut wanted to say that that I liked PX Me so much that I ended up also reading PX This. SO good, loved it!!!

    Am missing ur books already, please write more!! :-)

  22. abbe Says:

    hi again, “LOL”

    aww, thank you so much! kinda busy working on a new project right now, but i am trying to keep a diary as usual. so who knows– maybe that WILL end up being a whole other book.

    sorry for the wait.

  23. phil Says:

    Sounds like Rachel Klein. Total bitch as well.

  24. ruasty Says:

    gee she must know my X husband he says that any female who works in a restaurant is a Whore…..I divorced him and he remarried another female who works in a restaurant. HUM he went from (in his mind) one whore to another.

    Ann is a little ruff people skills lacking at times but the Food Network made her so……..

Leave a Reply

[in an effort to avoid "spam," comments with URLs are subject to pre-approval]