Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Young & Rubicam
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 3, 2009PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The verdict that plaintiff failed to prove a prima facie case of *431age discrimination and that the reasons defendant gave for his termination were not pretextual was based on a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Jordan v Bates Adv. Holdings, Inc., 46 AD3d 440 [2007], lv denied 11 NY3d 701 [2008]). The jury’s determination, based largely on credibility, is amply supported by the evidence, including plaintiff’s retraction of his allegation about his supervisors’ remarks, his “correction” of a deposition errata sheet to insert the word “older” in his recitation of one of those remarks, his…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Ioele v. Alden Press, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Jordan v. Bates Advertising Holdings, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Vincini v. American Building Maintenance Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ehrbar v. Forest Hills HospitalDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2015
- Alleva v. New York City Department of InvestigationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2010
- Powell v. Delta AirlinesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2015
- DeKenipp v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Lorenzo v. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital CenterDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2011
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.