in adjudging the severity of the environment. Harris, 510 U.S. at 23, 114 S.Ct. 367. Alone, however, this incident is not severe or pervasive enough to amount to a hostile work environment. See George, 407 F.3d at 417 (stating that an isolated incident is not sufficient to raise a hostile work environment claim). Yet, if the e-mails demonstrate that the defendant created a hostile work environment, this incident may lend credence toward her claim. 7 . The plaintiff executed a power attorney on July 26, 2006, indicating that her husband would represent her in connection with her employment claims. Def.’s Mot., Ex. 32. It is settled in this Circuit that an attorney’s actions on behalf of his or her client may qualify as protected activities under Title VII. Singletary, 351 F.3d at 525 (<HOLDING>). 8 . As an aside, the plaintiff avers that
holding that the conduct complained of must be an unlawful employment practice under title vii holding that an attorneys letters constitute protected conduct under title vii holding that individual employees are not liable under title vii holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii holding that there is no individual liability under title vii