Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Chiara v. Town of New Castle

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

Decided January 14, 2015No. 2012-06659Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRoman, J.

I disagree with my colleagues in the majority that the Supreme Court erred in awarding summary judgment to the defendants dismissing the cause of action to recover damages for employment discrimination in violation of Executive Law § 296. Therefore, I respectfully concur in part and dissent in part, and vote to affirm the order appealed from in its entirety.

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Executive Law § 296, a plaintiff who has been terminated from his or her employment must demonstrate that (1) he or she is a member of a protected class, (2) he or she was actively or…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Forrest v. Jewish Guild for the BlindNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. Ferrante v. American Lung Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
  4. Morse v. Cowtan & Tout, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  5. Doe v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API