From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Elizarov v. Omnimedia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 8, 2007
45 A.D.3d 327 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

Nos. 1946, 118284/03.

November 8, 2007.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered September 13, 2006, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Andrias, J.F., Saxe, Nardelli, McGuire and Malone, JJ.


Defendant offered legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for plaintiffs termination ( see St. Mary's Honor Center v Hicks, 509 US 502; Matter of Laverack Haines v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 88 NY2d 734, 738). Plaintiff offered no evidence in response to controvert defendant's proof that economic conditions required cost-cutting, resulting in significant job layoffs, or that defendant's downsizing was contrived for the purpose of terminating him ( see Alvarado v Hotel Salisbury, Inc., 38 AD3d 398; Bailey v New York Westchester Sq. Med. Ctr., 38 AD3d 119). Furthermore, because plaintiff conceded that his vacation request was granted by defendant and that he was permitted to attend religious services during his lunch hour, the court properly dismissed his "failure to accommodate" claim ( see Nichols v Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Ctr., 36 AD3d 426).


Summaries of

Elizarov v. Omnimedia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 8, 2007
45 A.D.3d 327 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Elizarov v. Omnimedia

Case Details

Full title:AVNER S. ELIZAROV, Appellant, v. MARTHA STEWART LIVING OMNIMEDIA, INC.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 8, 2007

Citations

45 A.D.3d 327 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 8385
845 N.Y.S.2d 263

Citing Cases

Jones v. City of N.Y.

In opposition, plaintiff has failed to present evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue as to whether…

Hunter v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

The final question is whether plaintiff is entitled to additional document discovery. The crux of this…