Jones v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jones v. New York City Transit Authority

166 A.D.2d 293, 562 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12051

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 18, 1990·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered August 8, 1989, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s employment as a probationary transit police officer was terminated on December 30, 1987, based ostensibly upon plaintiff’s record of derelictions and his marginal work performance. Plaintiff alleged that defendants’ termination decision was actually unlawful discrimination.

Plaintiff failed to raise material issues of fact to defeat defendants’ motion for summary judgment (CPLR 3212 [b]). None of the issues raised by plaintiff contradicted defendants’ proof that plaintiff’s poor work performance was the actual basis for the termination decision. Furthermore, the court did not err in granting summary judgment despite plaintiff’s failure to complete discovery, since plaintiff has failed to show that the requested material would have enabled him to demonstrate a triable issue of fact (CPLR 3212 [f]). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas and Smith, JJ.

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

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered August 8, 1989, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s employment as a probationary transit police officer was terminated on December 30, 1987, based ostensibly upon plaintiff’s record of derelictions and his marginal work performance. Plaintiff alleged that defendants’ termination decision was actually unlawful discrimination.

Plaintiff failed to raise material issues of fact to defeat defendants’ motion for summary judgment (CPLR 3212 [b]). None of the issues raised by plaintiff contradicted defendants’ proof that plaintiff’s poor work performance was the actual basis for the termination decision. Furthermore, the court did not err in granting summary judgment despite plaintiff’s failure to complete discovery, since plaintiff has failed to show that the requested material would have enabled him to demonstrate a triable issue of fact (CPLR 3212 [f]). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas and Smith, JJ.

Jones v. New York City Transit Authority, 166 A.D.2d 293, 562 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12051 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

166 A.D.2d 293 (Jones v. New York City Transit Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related