Lewkowicz v. Terence Cardinal Cook Health Ctr.
This text of 212 A.D.3d 443 (Lewkowicz v. Terence Cardinal Cook Health Ctr.) 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.
Opinion
| Lewkowicz v Terence Cardinal Cook Health Ctr. |
| 2023 NY Slip Op 00061 |
| Decided on January 10, 2023 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided and Entered: January 10, 2023
Before: Acosta, P.J., Webber, Moulton, Shulman, Higgitt, JJ.
Index No. 153100/20 Appeal No. 17046 Case No. 2021-04033
v
Terence Cardinal Cook Health Center et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Bergstein & Ullrich, New Paltz (Stephen Bergstein of counsel), for appellant.
Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC, Garden City (Jessica C. Moller of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David Benjamin Cohen, J.), entered April 14, 2021, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff failed to state a claim for age discrimination under the State and City Human Rights Law (Executive Law § 296[1][a]; Administrative Code of City of New York § 8-107[1][a]). While he alleged that he was 79 years old at the time defendants terminated his employment, he did not otherwise set forth any factual allegations showing that he was terminated under circumstances that gave rise to an inference of discrimination (see Massaro v Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 121 AD3d 569, 570 [1st Dept 2014], lv denied 26 NY3d 903 [2015]; Askin v Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 110 AD3d 621, 622 [1st Dept 2013]). Nothing in the pleading supports his
contention that the articulated reason for termination was a pretext for discrimination.THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: January 10, 2023
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
212 A.D.3d 443, 179 N.Y.S.3d 573, 2023 NY Slip Op 00061, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewkowicz-v-terence-cardinal-cook-health-ctr-nyappdiv-2023.