By: Walter Gonzalez, Esq. and Ty Hyderally, Esq.

October 7, 2026

Your performance reviews were fine. Perhaps, even excellent. Look at you go, what a hot shot!

But part of that excellence, well… you notice something, maybe something seems off, or even overtly inappropriate. And being the hotshot that you are… if you see something, you have to say something, right?

So, then you complained.

Maybe you reported discrimination against yourself. Maybe you raised concerns about the treatment of another employee. Maybe you went to Human Resources because something happening at work did not seem right.

And suddenly, everything changed.

The same work that was acceptable last month is now a problem. Your manager starts documenting every mistake. Meetings become uncomfortable. Expectations change. You are accused of not making enough progress. Then comes a performance improvement plan, disciplinary action, or termination.

Coincidence?

Sometimes. (The writer is not trying to gaslight you here)

But sometimes what happens after an employee complains is legally significant even when proving the original discrimination claim is difficult.

A recent New York appellate decision illustrates why.

Discrimination and Retaliation Are Different Claims

In Judson v. Elliott Management Corp., 250 A.D.3d 655 (1st Dep’t 2026), the plaintiff asserted age discrimination and retaliation claims arising from his employment.[1][2]

The Appellate Division ultimately agreed that his age discrimination claim should be dismissed. Among other things, the Court found insufficient evidence that younger employees were treated more favorably and determined that certain comments concerning the plaintiff’s age did not establish that his termination was motivated by age discrimination.

Image by vector4stock on Magnific

Normally, an employee hearing that result might assume the entire case was over.

It was not.

The Court separately reinstated his retaliation claim under the New York City Human Rights Law.

Which is an  extremely important distinction. An employee does not necessarily have to prove that the discrimination originally complained about ultimately occurred in order to establish unlawful retaliation for making a protected complaint.

What Happened After the Complaint Mattered

The plaintiff had communicated an internal discrimination complaint to Human Resources on behalf of one of his supervisees.

His employer later asserted legitimate reasons for terminating him, including dissatisfaction with his performance on an important project. According to the decision, some concerns about the project even existed before the complaint.

But the inquiry did not end there.

The plaintiff was terminated approximately three months after the Human Resources complaint.

The Court also considered evidence including a prior positive performance review, evidence that no other employee had been terminated because of the alleged lack of progress on the project, and a factual dispute concerning whether the person responsible for terminating the plaintiff actually knew about the protected complaint earlier than claimed.

Taken together, the Appellate Division concluded there was an issue of fact as to whether the employer’s stated reason was pretextual or whether retaliation played at least some part in the decision.

That issue was for a jury, not summary judgment.

Timing Is Important.

Employees often focus on timing:

“I complained Tuesday à got written up Friday.”

And timing can be powerful evidence.

You should evaluate other factors when evaluating timing

Ask what the workplace looked like before the complaint and what changed afterward. Were your evaluations positive before you complained? Did criticism suddenly become more frequent? Were performance standards changed? Did your employer begin documenting issues that previously went unmentioned? Were other employees treated differently for the same supposed problem? Did responsibilities disappear? Were you removed from meetings or projects? Did someone begin building a paper trail?

And perhaps most importantly: does the employer’s explanation match what actually happened?

These details can matter significantly when evaluating retaliation.

A Complaint Does Not Give Employee Immunity

There is an equally important caution.

Making a discrimination complaint does not prevent an employer from taking legitimate employment action.

An employee who complains can still be disciplined for legitimate misconduct. An employer can still address real performance problems. A complaint does not erase problems that genuinely existed beforehand.

That is why chronology and documentation matter so much.

If performance concerns were consistently documented for months before the employee complained, that may support the employer’s explanation.

But if years of satisfactory performance suddenly become “unacceptable” immediately after a protected complaint, the timing and circumstances may tell a very different story.

Judson is a good example of why courts look at the whole record.

The employer had evidence supporting its performance explanation.  The employee had evidence supporting an inference of retaliation. That conflict could not simply be resolved in the employer’s favor at summary judgment.

Preserve the “Before” and the “After”

Employees concerned about retaliation should preserve employment records that they are lawfully entitled to keep.

Especially important are records showing what existed before the complaint:

• Performance evaluations;
• Compliments or positive emails;
• Raises and bonuses;
• Awards;
• Productivity records;
• Prior disciplinary history, or the absence of one;
• Job duties and performance expectations.

Then document what happens afterward:

• New write-ups;
• Performance improvement plans;
• Changes in assignments;
• Exclusion from meetings;
• Changed schedules;
• Lost compensation;
• Hostile communications;
• Disciplinary notices;
• Termination documents.

And preserve the complaint itself whenever possible.

• What did you report?
• When?
• To whom?
• How did the employer respond?

A retaliation case often becomes a comparison between two periods of employment: before the protected activity and after it.

The Original Complaint and the Retaliation Claim Stand on Their Own Feet

One of the most important lessons from Judson is also one employees frequently misunderstand:  Retaliation law exists in part because employees must be able to raise legitimate workplace concerns, even if they are incorrect about the initial complaint.  So, if you complain about discrimination and suddenly become the workplace problem, do not assume that the failure of an underlying discrimination claim necessarily ends the analysis.

Sometimes what happened next becomes the case.

At Hyderally & Associates, P.C., we represent employees in New Jersey and New York facing discrimination, retaliation, harassment, wage violations, leave issues, and wrongful termination.

If you have questions regarding your rights as an employee, you should seek an experienced attorney who concentrates in employment law. Our firm has been concentrating in employment law for over twenty-three (23) years!

En nuestra firma hablamos español. This blog is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and may not reasonably be relied upon as such. If you face a legal issue, you should consult a qualified attorney for independent legal advice regarding your particular set of facts. This blog may constitute attorney advertising. This blog is not intended to communicate with anyone in a state or other jurisdiction where such a blog may fail to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state or jurisdiction.

[1] In Judson v. Elliott Management Corp., 2026 NY Slip Op 04145 (1st Dep’t 2026), the Appellate Division dismissed the plaintiff’s age discrimination claim but reinstated his retaliation claim under the New York City Human Rights Law. The court found insufficient evidence that age discrimination played any part in the termination, including a lack of evidence that similarly situated younger employees were treated more favorably. But the retaliation claim was different. The plaintiff had made an internal discrimination complaint to Human Resources on behalf of one of his supervisees, and he was terminated approximately three months later. Although the employer offered performance-based reasons for the termination, the court found factual issues concerning pretext and whether retaliation played at least some role in the decision. The court did not decide that retaliation occurred. It held that the dispute should not have been resolved in the employer’s favor on summary judgment.

[2] Judson v. Elliott Mgt. Corp., 250 A.D.3d 655, 2026 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4328, 2026 NY Slip Op 04145, 2026 LX 353568, 2026 WL 1871041