April 2014

Below is the complaint recently filed in the Supreme Court, New York County by Donald Goode against NYC hotspot S.O.B.’s (a/k/a Sounds of Brazil). Plaintiff alleges that he was shot in the leg by a patron while he was attending a concert and party at SOBs called “Mixtape Release SDMB NYC Edition” for rapper Fat Trel. He alleges (among other…

Read More Lawsuit Against SOB’s By Victim Shot During Fat Trel “Sex, Drugs, Money and Guns” Party

Here is the complaint, captioned Jackson v. OpenCommunications Omnimedia LLC et al, Index No. 151596/2014, filed on February 24, 2014 in New York State Supreme Court by a male plaintiff against his former employer, New York City media company OpenCommunications Omnimedia and three of its principals. Plaintiff claims he was sexually harassed by his female bosses and…

Read More Male Employee Asserts Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Claims Against Female Bosses at NYC Media Company

In Donohue v. Finkelstein Memorial Library, the Southern District of New York recently denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ sexual harassment (hostile work environment) claims. Generally, a plaintiff asserting a hostile work environment claim must establish two things: first, conduct rising to a sufficient level that constitutes a “hostile” or “abusive” working environment, and second,…

Read More SDNY Applies “Alter Ego/Proxy” Theory in Denying Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment in Sexual Harassment/Hostile Work Environment Case

Don’t cry fight over spilled milk alcohol. That’s the (non-legal) takeaway from Selmani v City of New York, in which the Appellate Division, Second Department permitted plaintiff’s claims for negligent hiring, supervision, training, and retention to continue against defendants City of New York and the New York City Fire Department. The case arose from injuries sustained by plaintiffs during…

Read More Bar Brawl Case Continues Against City and FDNY on Negligent Hiring/Supervision/Training/Retention Theory

In Kang v. Almanzar, the Appellate Division, First Department recently modified the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to defendant on the issue of whether plaintiff suffered a “serious injury” to her right shoulder under the “significant limitation in use” category set forth in Insurance Law § 5102(d). Initially, Defendants made a prima facie showing that…

Read More Plaintiff Presents Sufficient Evidence of “Significant Limitation” to Right Shoulder to Meet “Serious Injury” Threshold

Did a car accident cause plaintiff’s stroke? That is the question recently addressed by the First Department in Sadek v. Wesley. The court reversed a trial court ruling precluding plaintiff’s neurological experts from testifying and dismissing plaintiff’s complaint. This motor vehicle accident case arose from a collision between a limousine driven by plaintiff Sadek and a Greyhound…

Read More First Department Reverses Decision Precluding Expert Testimony on Causation and Condemns “Ambush” Trial Motion Practice

Generally speaking, sexual harassment[1]This discussion is confined to the employment context. is a form of sex-based discrimination typically characterized by unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical sexual conduct. The cause of action for sexual harassment is statutory, and is prohibited (in New York City) by Title VII of the…

Read More What is Sexual Harassment?

Today’s case summary comes out of the Second Department. In the illuminating decision of Conneally v. Diocese of Rockville Centre, decided April 23, 2014, the court affirmed the trial court’s denial of defendants’ motion for summary judgment. This case addresses a landowner’s duty to properly light their premises. “At about 9:00 p.m. on August 20, 2009,…

Read More Plaintiff Survives Summary Judgment in Premises Liability Case Involving Alleged Inadequate Lighting

In Atchison v. Metropolitan Enterprises, a recent trip-and-fall case, a Brooklyn trial court rejected defendants’ attempt to subject plaintiff to a second Independent Medical Examination (IME). They sought the second examination due to intervening events which, to put it mildly, raised questions as to the first doctor’s credibility. (Note: As a plaintiff’s lawyer, I – as…

Read More Perjury Allegation Against Medical Expert Does Not Justify Second Medical Examination of Plaintiff in Trip-and-Fall Personal Injury Suit