Babiker v. Ross University School of Medicine

Second Circuit

Babiker v. Ross University School of Medicine

86 F. App'x 457

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJanuary 26, 2004

DocketNo. 00-7899

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 86 F. App'x 457 (Babiker v. Ross University School of Medicine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Babiker v. Ross University School of Medicine, 86 F. App'x 457 (2d Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Pro se Plaintiff-Appellant Nasir Abdalla Babiker appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Katz, M.J.) entered pursuant to a Memorandum Opinion and Order dated May 19, 2000, granting appellee’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing appellant’s complaint.

This Court reviews the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, construing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See Tenenbaum v. Williams, 193 F.3d 581, 593 (2d Cir.1999). This court has noted that an extra measure of caution is merited when affirming a grant of summary judgment in discrimination cases because direct evidence of discriminatory intent is rare and such intent must often be inferred from evidence found in affidavits and depositions. See, e.g., Gallo v. Prudential Residential Servs., 22 F.3d 1219, 1224 (2d Cir.1994). Here, the district court, looking at the evidence in the light most favorable to Mr. Babiker, thoroughly reviewed his claims, and correctly granted the appellee’s motion for summary judgment.

For the reasons stated in the district court’s thorough opinion, we affirm. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SUMMARY ORDER

Pro se Plaintiff-Appellant Nasir Abdalla Babiker appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Katz, M.J.) entered pursuant to a Memorandum Opinion and Order dated May 19, 2000, granting appellee’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing appellant’s complaint.

This Court reviews the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, construing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See Tenenbaum v. Williams, 193 F.3d 581, 593 (2d Cir.1999). This court has noted that an extra measure of caution is merited when affirming a grant of summary judgment in discrimination cases because direct evidence of discriminatory intent is rare and such intent must often be inferred from evidence found in affidavits and depositions. See, e.g., Gallo v. Prudential Residential Servs., 22 F.3d 1219, 1224 (2d Cir.1994). Here, the district court, looking at the evidence in the light most favorable to Mr. Babiker, thoroughly reviewed his claims, and correctly granted the appellee’s motion for summary judgment.

For the reasons stated in the district court’s thorough opinion, we affirm. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 F. App'x 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/babiker-v-ross-university-school-of-medicine-ca2-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack