Court: NY Supreme Queens

In Pickering v. Uptown Communications & Elec., Inc., the New York Supreme Court (Queens County) denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s “prior conviction” discrimination claim, but dismissed his race discrimination claim. Defendant Uptown, a contractor for Time Warner Cable of New York City, employed plaintiff as a cable technician. A criminal background check…

Read More Cable Technician’s Criminal Conviction Discrimination Claim Continues; Race Discrimination Claim Dismissed
Share This:

Recently in Amadu v. Stratus Hacking Corp., a car accident case, the New York Supreme Court, Queens County held that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he suffered a “serious injury” within the meaning of Insurance Law Section 5102(d). The “serious injury” issue is critical in an automobile…

Read More Medical Evidence of “Strained Lumbar Spine” and “Right Ankle Sprain” Sufficient to Create Fact Issue Regarding “Serious Injury” in Car Accident Case
Share This:

In Naheem v. Y. Ron Taxi, a three-car accident case, the court awarded summary judgment to the driver and owner of the lead car, which was struck from behind. To simplify the facts, the accident allegedly proceeded as follows, with Car 1 striking Car 2 and propelling it into Car 3: CAR 1 (Rasheed) —–>…

Read More Court Awards Summary Judgment to Rear-Ended Car in Three-Car Accident
Share This:

In Rampersaud v. Parmanand, a Queens trial court issued a decision explaining the circumstances under which summary judgment is appropriate in a rear-end collision case. Plaintiff Rampersaud was a passenger in a car driven by Parmanand when it was struck in the rear by a car driven by Cunningham.  Defendant driver Parmanand (and co-defendant owner…

Read More Sudden Stop of Lead Vehicle Creates Issues of Fact in Rear-End Car Accident Case
Share This:

In Malik v. American International Group, Inc., the Supreme Court, Queens County denied defendants’ summary judgment motions regarding a number of plaintiff’s claims, including sexual harassment (quid pro quo and hostile work environment), race discrimination, and disability discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law. Time Bar and Continuing Violation Doctrine Defendants argued that plaintiff’s claims…

Read More Issues of Fact Preclude Summary Judgment for Defendant on Sex, Race, and Disability Discrimination Claims
Share This: