A judge this week dismissed most sexual harassment and discrimination claims by Roshani Sheth, a former employee of the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR), who has alleged she was mistreated by supervisors and subsequently fired and threatened by NAR.
In an 18-page opinion, Judge Georgia Alexakis of the Northern District of Illinois dismissed four out of five claims Sheth had brought against her former employer, including the accusations of discrimination and retaliation, writing that the former employee had not alleged enough factual evidence to proceed with the lawsuit.
But Sheth’s claim of breach of contract will proceed, based on the assertion that NAR refused to verify her employment or provide any sort of reference to prospective future employers.
In a statement, an NAR spokesperson said that, “(w)e are pleased that NAR’s motion to dismiss was granted for four of five claims in this case, and we will defend against the remaining claim before the Court.”
The spokesperson said NAR would not comment further “on matters of employment.”
Sheth or her attorneys could not immediately be reached for comment.
Sheth’s claims go back to 2019, before a New York Times investigation in 2023 unearthed what several former NAR employees characterized as a culture of sexual harassment and retaliation at the organization.
Sheth was interviewed for that story, claiming she had been fired after complaining to former NAR executives Donna Gland and Katie Johnson that her supervisors made disparaging comments about her race, body and marital status. She claimed—both to the Times and in her lawsuit—that she subsequently received anonymous, threatening text messages calling her a “rat,” which she alleges were sent either by NAR or on its behalf.
Alexakis wrote in her dismissal that Sheth had not provided more than circumstantial evidence that these text messages were part of an attempt by NAR to retaliate against her.
“Without supporting facts (namely, who sent the texts and what their relationship with NAR was at that time), Sheth’s conclusory allegation that the texts were sent through NAR’s agents is not enough,” the judge wrote.
And while Alexakis affirmed that Sheth had successfully argued that NAR violated its contractual obligations by not providing her a reference for future jobs, there also was not enough evidence to prove this was part of any sort of illegal retaliation.
“In the absence of a purely temporal connection, Sheth must plead some facts suggesting that NAR had a retaliatory motive when it failed to respond to the reference requests,” the judge wrote. “(I)t is not this Court’s role to connect dots for Sheth.”
As far as hostile work environment claims based on alleged harassment, Alexakis ruled that a settlement agreement Sheth signed with NAR “released any claims based on NAR’s actions during her employment.” Subsequent actions—namely, the harassing text messages and refusal to provide references—are not enough to meet the legal burden of this claim, Alexakis wrote.
On the other hand, Alexakis said that “at this early stage,” NAR’s lack of response to any of Sheth’s prospective future employers—with Sheth claiming the organization would not even verify her basic employment details, costing her at least one job—is enough to move forward with a breach of contract claim.
Sheth will have the opportunity to amend her complaint with more allegations or evidence, however, and attempt to revive the retaliation and harassment complaints, with a deadline of May 13 to file new evidence or arguments.
