From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sorge v. Gona Realty, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Nov 10, 2020
188 A.D.3d 474 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

12328 Index No. 20469/18E Case No. 2019-5643

11-10-2020

James SORGE, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. GONA REALTY, LLC, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

McNamara & Horowitz LLP, New York (David Paul Horowitz of counsel), for appellants. Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, New York (Nathan Monroe–Yavneh of counsel), for respondent.


McNamara & Horowitz LLP, New York (David Paul Horowitz of counsel), for appellants.

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, New York (Nathan Monroe–Yavneh of counsel), for respondent.

Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Oing, Mendez, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered June 24, 2019, which denied defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint and granted plaintiff's cross motion to amend his pleadings, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

For the purpose of a pre-answer motion to dismiss the complaint alleging violations of the New York State and City Human Rights Laws, plaintiff sufficiently alleged that he was employed by defendants (see Vig v. New York Hairspray Co., L.P., 67 A.D.3d 140, 145, 885 N.Y.S.2d 74 [1st Dept. 2009] ). The evidence submitted by defendants did not conclusively establish that during the relevant time period they had fewer than four employees so that they were not "employers" under the State and City Human Rights Laws (see Francis v. Eisenbeiss, 101 A.D.3d 414, 955 N.Y.S.2d 23 [1st Dept. 2012] ).

The cross motion to amend was properly granted. Contrary to the defendants' contention, CPLR 3014 specifically authorizes pleading of inconsistent theories and defenses (see CPLR 3014 ; Kerzhner v. G4S Govt. Solutions, Inc., 138 A.D.3d 564, 565, 30 N.Y.S.3d 620 [1st Dept. 2016] ). Moreover, on a motion for leave to amend, plaintiff does not need to establish the merit of his proposed new allegations, but show that the proffered amendment is not "palpably insufficient or clearly devoid of merit," which plaintiff has done here (see MBIA Ins. Corp. v. Greystone & Co., Inc., 74 A.D.3d 499, 500, 901 N.Y.S.2d 522 [1st Dept. 2010] ).

We have reviewed defendants' contentions and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Sorge v. Gona Realty, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Nov 10, 2020
188 A.D.3d 474 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

Sorge v. Gona Realty, LLC

Case Details

Full title:James Sorge, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Gona Realty, LLC, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 10, 2020

Citations

188 A.D.3d 474 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 6409
131 N.Y.S.3d 876

Citing Cases

Olam Corp. v. Thayer

The Court supplements its oral decision to discuss in greater detail the standard for determining whether…

Mack v. The City of New York

On a motion for leave to amend the complaint, the plaintiff does not need to establish the merits of his…