Johnson v. New York Presbyterian Hospital

Second Circuit

Johnson v. New York Presbyterian Hospital

55 F. App'x 25

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJanuary 29, 2003

DocketNo. 02-7562

StatusPublished

This text of 55 F. App'x 25 (Johnson v. New York Presbyterian Hospital) 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

Johnson v. New York Presbyterian Hospital, 55 F. App'x 25 (2d Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY . ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

In September 2000, James Johnson filed a complaint against New York Presbyterian Hospital and Herbert Pardes, Presi[26]*26dent of the Hospital, alleging that they retaliated against him in a discriminatory fashion in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 701, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12112. We have considered all of the appellant’s arguments. Upon review of the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and order dismissing Johnson’s complaint, we affirm for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court’s memorandum opinion and order. See Johnson v. New York Presbyterian Hosp., No. 00 Civ. 6776, 2001 WL 829868 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2001).

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

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY . ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

In September 2000, James Johnson filed a complaint against New York Presbyterian Hospital and Herbert Pardes, Presi[26]*26dent of the Hospital, alleging that they retaliated against him in a discriminatory fashion in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 701, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12112. We have considered all of the appellant’s arguments. Upon review of the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and order dismissing Johnson’s complaint, we affirm for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court’s memorandum opinion and order. See Johnson v. New York Presbyterian Hosp., No. 00 Civ. 6776, 2001 WL 829868 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2001).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 F. App'x 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-new-york-presbyterian-hospital-ca2-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack