From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stewart v. Schulte Roth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 4, 2007
44 A.D.3d 354 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 1646.

October 4, 2007.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sallie Manzanet, J.), entered July 26, 2006, which, in an action for employment discrimination based on race, granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Mildred Stewart, appellant pro se.

Schulte Roth Zabel LLP, New York (Holly H. Weiss of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Catterson and Kavanagh, JJ.


Plaintiff, an African-American hired by defendant law firm as a paralegal, failed to adduce evidence responsive to defendant's showing that its termination of plaintiff was based on well-documented, ongoing poor performance reviews by many of the attorneys for whom plaintiff worked ( see Ferrante v American Lung Assn., 90 NY2d 623, 629, 631). Plaintiffs evidence does not address these performance reviews, but instead focuses on the transfer of some of her cases to her only similarly situated coworker, a Caucasian, thereby reducing her billable hours and denying her credit for work she performed. Although informed of defendant's antidiscrimination policies, including a requirement that discrimination complaints be reported to certain individuals, plaintiff, while employed, never complained that this shifting of work was discriminatory, and even now does not show circumstances permitting an inference that it was. Defendant's reason for terminating plaintiff was not insufficient billable hours or an unwillingness to work, but the poor quality of her work and an inability to accept suggestions that might improve her work. There is no evidence tending to show that the poor performance reviews were inaccurate, much less the product of collusion among the reviewing attorneys to supply a pretext for race discrimination. We have considered plaintiffs claims of hostile work environment and retaliation and find them also without merit.


Summaries of

Stewart v. Schulte Roth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 4, 2007
44 A.D.3d 354 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Stewart v. Schulte Roth

Case Details

Full title:MILDRED STEWART, Appellant, v. SCHULTE ROTH ZABEL LLP, Respondent

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

Date published: Oct 4, 2007

Citations

44 A.D.3d 354 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 7376
841 N.Y.S.2d 878

Citing Cases

Wilkinson v. Community Preservation Corp.

Before: Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Acosta, Renwick and Román, JJ. In support of her discrimination and…

Clark v. Morelli Ratner PC

Although the court erred to the extent it found that federal standards for recovery are applied in…