Opinion
14784 Index No. 158020/18 Case No. 2021-01656
12-07-2021
Edward LETTAU, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. 1199 SEIU NATIONAL BENEFIT FUND, Defendant–Respondent.
Michael G. O'Neill, New York, for appellant. Ian A. Weinberger, New York, for respondent.
Michael G. O'Neill, New York, for appellant.
Ian A. Weinberger, New York, for respondent.
Acosta, P.J., Gische, Webber, Friedman, Kennedy, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered on or about January 15, 2021, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint brought under the New York City Human Rights Law, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.
Defendant's summary judgment motion should have been denied because the record raises an issue of fact as to whether defendant fulfilled its obligation to engage in a cooperative dialogue with plaintiff, a disabled employee, to determine whether a reasonable accommodation of his disability could be devised (see Administrative Code of City of N.Y. § 8–107[28][a][2] [making it unlawful for an employer "to refuse or otherwise fail to engage in a cooperative dialogue within a reasonable time with a person who has requested an accommodation ... (r)elated to a disability"]; see also Administrative Code § 8–102 [defining "cooperative dialogue" and "reasonable accommodation"]; Administrative Code § 8–107[15][a] [requiring employers "to make reasonable accommodation to the needs of persons with disabilities"]; Hosking v. Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Ctr., 186 A.D.3d 58, 65, 126 N.Y.S.3d 98 [1st Dept. 2020] ). In view of this determination, we need not reach the remaining issues raised by the parties.