Legal Opinion
Giuntoli v. Garvin Guybutler Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 7, 1989No. 88 Civ. 1931 (RJW)PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBERT J. WARD, District Judge.
Defendants Garvin Guybutler Corporation (“Garvin”) and Steven Tilton (“Tilton”) move, on various grounds, for partial dismissal of plaintiff’s Amended Complaint and Jury Demand (the “Amended Complaint”). Plaintiff Ivana Giuntoli (“Giuntoli”) cross-moves for sanctions, pursuant to Rule 11, Fed.R.Civ.P., with respect to the portion of defendants’ motion that seeks dismissal of plaintiff’s New York State Human Rights claim on grounds of election of remedies. For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part, and…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Oscar Mayer & Co. v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Alvin PROMISEL, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FIRST AMERICAN ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS, INC., Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Dortz v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1995
- Ryan v. Kellogg Partners Institutional ServicesNew York Court of Appeals · 2012
- Troy v. RutgersSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2001
- Poulsen v. City of North Tonawanda, NYDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1993
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.