Cohen v. Hunter College

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cohen v. Hunter College

80 A.D.3d 452, 913 N.Y.S.2d 556

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 2011

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 80 A.D.3d 452 (Cohen v. Hunter College) 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

Cohen v. Hunter College, 80 A.D.3d 452, 913 N.Y.S.2d 556 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered November 6, 2009, which, in an action alleging unlawful termination in violation of Labor Law § 740, granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly determined that plaintiff failed to plead that defendants violated a “law, rule or regulation” (Labor Law § 740 [2] [a]'; see Bordell v General Elec. Co., 88 NY2d 869 [1996]; Connolly v Macklowe Real Estate Co., 161 AD2d 520 [1990]). Defendants’ internal policies concerning workplace violence and emergency withdrawal of students are not rules or regulations promulgated to enforce a law.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Friedman, McGuire and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered November 6, 2009, which, in an action alleging unlawful termination in violation of Labor Law § 740, granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly determined that plaintiff failed to plead that defendants violated a “law, rule or regulation” (Labor Law § 740 [2] [a]'; see Bordell v General Elec. Co., 88 NY2d 869 [1996]; Connolly v Macklowe Real Estate Co., 161 AD2d 520 [1990]). Defendants’ internal policies concerning workplace violence and emergency withdrawal of students are not rules or regulations promulgated to enforce a law.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Friedman, McGuire and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.3d 452, 913 N.Y.S.2d 556, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-hunter-college-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack