Legal Opinion · Dissent

Perez v. Wegman Companies

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 13, 1992Published

1Dissent

Doerr, J. (dissenting).

I agree with the majority’s conclusion, implicit in the decision, that principles of res judicata do not bar plaintiff’s amended complaint. Plaintiff’s wrongful discharge claims were not dismissed on the merits but, rather, *1011were dismissed based upon their failure to state a valid cause of action under New York law. Consequently, the dismissal should not be given res judicata effect.

I disagree with the majority’s conclusion, however, that plaintiff’s amended complaint, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 740, the so-called "whistle-blower statute”, is time-barred. In my…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kern v. DePaul Mental Health Services, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  2. Smith v. Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API