Opinion
11355 Index 152069/14
04-02-2020
Robert STEC, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. PASSPORT BRANDS, INC., et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Stulberg & Walsh, LLP, New York (Patrick J. Walsh of counsel), for appellant. Lazarus & Lazarus, P.C., New York (Yvette J. Sutton of counsel), for respondents.
Stulberg & Walsh, LLP, New York (Patrick J. Walsh of counsel), for appellant.
Lazarus & Lazarus, P.C., New York (Yvette J. Sutton of counsel), for respondents.
Renwick, J.P., Richter, Mazzarelli, Singh, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy Friedman, J.), entered August 22, 2018, which, to the extent appealed from, granted that portion of defendants' motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of plaintiff's claim for unpaid wages under the Labor Law, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff's Labor Law § 193 claim was properly dismissed because plaintiff did not allege that defendants made deductions from his salary, and withholding of payment is not actionable under this statutory section (see Perella Weinberg Partners LLC v. Kramer, 153 A.D.3d 443, 449–450, 58 N.Y.S.3d 384 [1st Dept. 2017] ; see also Goldberg v. Jacquet, 667 Fed. Appx. 313, 314 [2d Cir.2016] ). Moreover, defendants' submissions show that plaintiff agreed to have his salary withheld during various pay periods in order to allow Passport to continue its operations in the midst of its financial troubles, establishing that his wages were not reduced in the manner prohibited by Labor Law § 193. We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.