Green v. Continuum Health Partners, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Green v. Continuum Health Partners, Inc.

88 A.D.3d 487, 930 N.Y.2d 449

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

DecidedOctober 11, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 88 A.D.3d 487 (Green v. Continuum Health Partners, 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

Green v. Continuum Health Partners, Inc., 88 A.D.3d 487, 930 N.Y.2d 449 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff failed to show a continuing violation between the sexual harassment that he alleges occurred before December 30, 2005, three years before he commenced this action (see CPLR 214 [2]; Murphy v American Home Prods. Corp., 58 NY2d 293, 307 [1983]), and the harassment that he alleges occurred on July 31, 2008 (see Sirota v New York City Bd. of Educ., 283 AD2d 369 [2001]). The record demonstrates that for four years before July 31, 2008, the alleged harasser, a coworker, did not communicate with plaintiff about anything other than hospital business.

As to the single timely filed allegation, plaintiff failed to show that defendants acquiesced in the coworker’s conduct or failed to take appropriate corrective action (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-107 [13] [b] [2], [3]). The record demonstrates that defendants conducted an investigation and terminated the coworker within several months after plaintiffs receipt of the letter.

Plaintiff also failed to show, based on defendants’ handling of his complaints and the complaints of female employees, that he was treated less well than other employees because of his gender (see Williams v New York City Hous. Auth., 61 AD3d 62, 78 [2009]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Catterson, Moskowitz and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Plaintiff failed to show a continuing violation between the sexual harassment that he alleges occurred before December 30, 2005, three years before he commenced this action (see CPLR 214 [2]; Murphy v American Home Prods. Corp., 58 NY2d 293, 307 [1983]), and the harassment that he alleges occurred on July 31, 2008 (see Sirota v New York City Bd. of Educ., 283 AD2d 369 [2001]). The record demonstrates that for four years before July 31, 2008, the alleged harasser, a coworker, did not communicate with plaintiff about anything other than hospital business.

As to the single timely filed allegation, plaintiff failed to show that defendants acquiesced in the coworker’s conduct or failed to take appropriate corrective action (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-107 [13] [b] [2], [3]). The record demonstrates that defendants conducted an investigation and terminated the coworker within several months after plaintiffs receipt of the letter.

Plaintiff also failed to show, based on defendants’ handling of his complaints and the complaints of female employees, that he was treated less well than other employees because of his gender (see Williams v New York City Hous. Auth., 61 AD3d 62, 78 [2009]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Catterson, Moskowitz and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 A.D.3d 487, 930 N.Y.2d 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-v-continuum-health-partners-inc-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack