Marshall-Zimbal v. Harvey's Drugs of Manlius, Inc.
This text of 214 A.D.2d 1038 (Marshall-Zimbal v. Harvey's Drugs of Manlius, 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.
Opinion
Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and amended complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s motion for summary- judgment. Defendant tendered evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to establish that it had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for failing to reinstate plaintiff at the end of her maternity leave (see, Brown v General Elec. Co., 144 AD2d 746, 748). The unsubstantiated assertions of plaintiff that defendant’s proffered reasons were merely a pretext for discrimination based upon her gender and her pregnancy-related disability are insufficient to defeat defendant’s motion (see, Brown v General Elec. Co., supra, at 748; Hill v Westchester Aeronautical Corp., 112 [1039]*1039AD2d 977, 978). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Elliott, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Den-man, P. J., Green, Fallon, Doerr and Balio, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
214 A.D.2d 1038, 627 N.Y.S.2d 598, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marshall-zimbal-v-harveys-drugs-of-manlius-inc-nyappdiv-1995.