She requested accommodation with an end date. They let her go anyway, the suit alleges
A physician alleges NYU Langone Health fired her for getting pregnant and needing time to recover.
The complaint, filed October 7, 2026, in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, alleges the academic medical system turned a new mother's maternity leave and postpartum spinal complications into grounds for termination - after months of what the filing describes as pressure, hostility, and a flat refusal to discuss accommodations.
The physician had trained at NYU Langone Hospital - Long Island as a medical resident starting in July 2022, according to the complaint. Her performance was strong enough that the institution offered her a full-time hospitalist and clinical instructor position, effective July 1, 2025, at $230,000 annually plus incentive bonuses of up to $35,000.
She was not a marginal hire.
On May 15, 2025, the complaint alleges, she emailed her direct supervisor to share her pregnancy news, writing that it was "an important and exciting update" and asking to be pointed toward the right HR contacts for planning maternity leave. The filing alleges the supervisor did not respond favorably and did not answer her question about who else to contact. Other NYU personnel, according to the complaint, responded with congratulations and logistical support.
By June 2025, NYU personnel had laid out a maternity leave plan: six to eight weeks depending on delivery method, three weeks of paid family leave, one week of vacation, and unpaid leave for any remaining time - roughly 10 to 12 weeks paid, with FMLA protections referenced, the complaint states.
She went into preterm labor and gave birth on August 13, 2025. Two days later, she emailed senior staff to let them know about complications and ask what paperwork was needed.
Then came the postpartum spinal problems.
The complaint alleges the physician developed disabling back pain, weakness, and cervical disc pathology following childbirth. In October 2025, her orthopedist provided a work restriction letter. She emailed her supervisor and administrators on October 30 to flag the issue, attaching the medical note and noting she was on FMLA until November 10.
According to the filing, her supervisor's response was blunt: "No additional documentation is needed if you will be returning 11/10 as scheduled. Please let us know asap if there will be any delays to your return date."
She could not return on November 10. She told HR and submitted updated medical documentation.
What followed, according to the complaint, was months of mounting pressure. The filing alleges her supervisor repeatedly called her during leave and pressed her to return because of the division's heavy flu-season workload. When the physician submitted an accommodation letter from her doctor in February 2026, the complaint alleges her supervisor responded with immediate skepticism, questioning whether the letter's content matched the physician's email.
On February 17, 2026, a senior administrator wrote to the physician on behalf of NYU, according to the filing. The letter stated she had exhausted her six-month disability leave benefit "due to birth of a child" and warned that "a leave extension will be burdensome for the department and will only be granted if reasonable."
Ten days later came another letter. The complaint quotes it: "Please understand that your absence impacts service to our patients and places a burden on other staff members. For these reasons, we are unable to accommodate your current leave extension beyond 3/8/2026. If you are unable to return to work 3/9/2026 with or without a workplace accommodation, you may be released from employment."
The physician pushed back. On March 6, 2026, she emailed asking for the chance to discuss reasonable accommodations, the complaint states. According to the filing, she wrote: "I have repeatedly asked NYU Langone HR and administrators for the opportunity to discuss reasonable accommodations and have received no response."
The response, as quoted in the complaint, denied that any such prior requests existed: "Our records do not reflect recent communication from you regarding a request to engage about a workplace accommodation." It described her requests as "indefinite" in nature. The filing alleges that characterization was false because the physician had repeatedly submitted medical notes with specific return dates.
The administrator attached accommodation paperwork and asked the physician to fill it out "as soon as possible." She did.
On March 18, 2026, the complaint alleges she submitted an accommodation request for remote work with frequent breaks, backed by medical documentation. The provider portion listed her condition as not permanent, gave an approximate end date of April 1, 2026, and identified limitations including sitting, standing, walking, climbing stairs, and reaching.
That submission went nowhere, according to the filing.
On March 24, an employee relations representative met with the physician and told her that her supervisor "had full discretion over personnel" and had decided to deny further leave or accommodation and end her employment, the complaint alleges. The next day, NYU informed her she was being terminated effective March 27, 2026.
According to the complaint, the physician emailed the representative on March 26, writing: "It's unfortunate that after completing my residency and dedicating so much time and effort to patient care, I am not only being 'released from employment' due to the inability to accommodate me and my current medical condition, but I'm also being treated like this."
The complaint raises a contract angle alongside the discrimination claims. The physician's employment agreement defined "Disability" as inability to perform essential functions for 180 calendar days in any 12-month period - and required the employer to go through the interactive process before invoking that provision. The filing argues that the physician's maternity leave, which NYU itself repeatedly classified as leave "due to birth of a child," should not count as leave for "physical or mental impairment." Only 137 days passed between the end of her maternity leave on November 10, 2025, and her termination on March 27, 2026, the complaint states - well short of the 180-day threshold.
The lawsuit brings 16 counts including pregnancy and sex discrimination under Title VII and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, disability discrimination under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act, FMLA interference and retaliation, violations of the New York State Human Rights Law, aiding and abetting claims against the two individual defendants, New York Labor Law retaliation, and breach of contract. The physician seeks back pay, front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and injunctive relief. A jury trial has been demanded.
For HR teams, the case puts a practical question on the table: when leave administration runs through a direct supervisor rather than a neutral, centralized process, who is minding the paper trail - and the legal exposure - when accommodation requests go unanswered?
The allegations in this complaint have not been tested, and no court has made any findings or rulings in the matter.
