Bones v. Prudential Financial, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bones v. Prudential Financial, Inc.

54 A.D.3d 589, 863 N.Y.S.2d 368

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 16, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 54 A.D.3d 589 (Bones v. Prudential Financial, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bones v. Prudential Financial, Inc., 54 A.D.3d 589, 863 N.Y.S.2d 368 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard B. Lowe, III, J.), entered August 23, 2007, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants dismissing the complaint.

Plaintiffs institution of an action against his former employer, defendant Prudential Insurance Company of America, “in accordance with” Labor Law § 740 constitutes “a waiver of the rights and remedies available under any other contract, collective bargaining agreement, law, rule or regulation or under the common law” (Labor Law § 740 [7]), including his remaining claim for promissory estoppel, which arises from the allegedly unlawful discharge (Hayes v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 39 AD3d 593 [2007]). Such a waiver may not be avoided by a plaintiff by amending the complaint, to withdraw the Labor Law § 740 claim (Reddington v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 11 NY3d 80, 87-88 [2008]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Nardelli, JJ. [See 17 Misc 3d 656.]

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard B. Lowe, III, J.), entered August 23, 2007, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants dismissing the complaint.

Plaintiffs institution of an action against his former employer, defendant Prudential Insurance Company of America, “in accordance with” Labor Law § 740 constitutes “a waiver of the rights and remedies available under any other contract, collective bargaining agreement, law, rule or regulation or under the common law” (Labor Law § 740 [7]), including his remaining claim for promissory estoppel, which arises from the allegedly unlawful discharge (Hayes v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 39 AD3d 593 [2007]). Such a waiver may not be avoided by a plaintiff by amending the complaint, to withdraw the Labor Law § 740 claim (Reddington v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 11 NY3d 80, 87-88 [2008]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Nardelli, JJ. [See 17 Misc 3d 656.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.3d 589, 863 N.Y.S.2d 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bones-v-prudential-financial-inc-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack