finding that budget cuts were a legitimate reason for terminating employment, regardless of whether the employee's salary "significantly decrease[d] the projected financial shortfall"
Summary of this case from Osborne v. Literacy Partners, Inc.No. 96-7778.
January 24, 1997.
Appeal from the S.D.N.Y.
Vacated.
finding that budget cuts were a legitimate reason for terminating employment, regardless of whether the employee's salary "significantly decrease[d] the projected financial shortfall"
Summary of this case from Osborne v. Literacy Partners, Inc.noting that pursuant to the Younger doctrine, a federal court should not "interfere with a state court"
Summary of this case from MacPherson v. Town of Southamptonnoting that pursuant to the Younger doctrine, a federal court should not "interfere with a state court"
Summary of this case from MacPherson v. Town of SouthamptonFull title:Christopher Ambroze, M.D., P.C., v. Aetna Health Plans of New York, Inc
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Date published: Jan 24, 1997
There is a presumption that a jury's award is valid, and "[t]he possibility of non-duplicative awards is…
Wright v. DuncanIn New York, the trial court often conducts a so-called Settles hearing outside the presence of the jury to…