Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the easy-footnotes domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the google-document-embedder domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the ninja-tables-pro domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the spam-free-wordpress domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the themelia domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121

Deprecated: The called constructor method for WP_Widget class in wpcs_search_Widget is deprecated since version 4.3.0! Use __construct() instead. in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121

Deprecated: The called constructor method for WP_Widget class in wpcs_most_view_Widget is deprecated since version 4.3.0! Use __construct() instead. in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121
Summary Judgment on Disability Discrimination, Retaliation Claims Not Warranted in Light of Conflicting Interpretations of Evidence – Pospis Law, PLLC
Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /var/www/wp-content/themes/themelia/inc/themelia.php on line 274

Summary Judgment on Disability Discrimination, Retaliation Claims Not Warranted in Light of Conflicting Interpretations of Evidence

In Caputo v. Iesi NY Corp., No. 150594/2018, 2023 WL 5167701 (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Aug. 11, 2023), the court held that summary judgment was inappropriate on plaintiff’s claims of discrimination and retaliation.

From the decision:

Here, issues of fact preclude summary judgment on all claims related to discrimination and retaliation. Plaintiff and defendant agree that plaintiff used a sick day to be excused from work for a kidney stone type condition; plaintiff posted a social media picture of himself spectating a sports game that same day; plaintiff’s supervisor viewed the social media picture and sought a meeting with plaintiff to discuss the ostensible use of a sick day to attend the sports game; plaintiff reported the supervisor’s actions to HR; plaintiff’s sales goals were later increased; plaintiff was unable to meet these increased sales goals; and plaintiff’s employment was terminated. However, unsurprisingly, the parties draw opposite conclusions from the evidence submitted on these motions. Plaintiff contends that the increased sales goals were retaliation for his report to HR following his supervisor’s actions. Defendant contends that the increased sales goals were set by another individual, not plaintiff’s supervisor, and the increase occurred long after plaintiff’s HR report. The conclusion drawn from this evidence is that of the fact finder, not the Court on summary judgment.

The court also held that summary judgment dismissing defendant’s counterclaim for breach of the parties’ employment employment agreement. Among other things, the court noted that it was undisputed that plaintiff did not comply with the agreement (specifically, its requirement that plaintiff return all confidential information in his possession).

Share This: