that no single act is the sole subject of the allegation. Smith v. Kmart Corp., No. CS 95-248, 1996 WL 780490, * 7 (E.D.Wash. Dec. 18, 1996). Rather, it is the continuation of the hostile working environment and the resulting constructive discharge that constitute violations of the ADA See id. A hostile work environment exists when the workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment. Karibian v. Columbia Univ., 14 F.3d 773, 779 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 512 U.S. 1213, 114 S.Ct. 2693, 129 L.Ed.2d 824 (1994); Meritor Sav. Bank. v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 65, 106 S.Ct. 2399, 2404-05, 91 L.Ed.2d 49 (1986); see Hendler v. Intelecom USA, Inc., 963 F.Supp. 200 (E.D.N.Y.1997) (<HOLDING>); Haysman v. Food Lion, Inc., 893 F.Supp. 1092
holding that a viable hostile work environment claim requires an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive recognizing hostile work environment discrimination in ada context recognizing a hostile work environment claim under section 1983 recognizing that the elements of title vii sexually hostile work environment claims apply to icra sexually hostile work environment claims holding that a hostile work environment is a form of discrimination that is actionable under the statute