Mounts v. Goldman Sachs, Inc.

85 F. App'x 245
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedJanuary 12, 2004
DocketNo. 03-7383
StatusPublished

This text of 85 F. App'x 245 (Mounts v. Goldman Sachs, Inc.) 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
Mounts v. Goldman Sachs, Inc., 85 F. App'x 245 (2d Cir. 2004).

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED [246]*246AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Judith K. Mounts appeals from the entry of judgment in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Preska, /.), summarily dismissing her sex discrimination, retaliation, equal pay and other claims asserted under various federal and state laws, and summarily granting Goldman Sachs’s breach-of-contract counterclaim. Familiarity is assumed as to the facts, the procedural context, and the specification of appellate issues.

The district court’s grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo. E.g., Howley v. Town of Stratford, 217 F.3d 141, 151 (2d Cir.2000). For substantially the reasons stated on the transcript by the district court, the district court properly dismissed Mounts’s various claims and granted Goldman’s counterclaim.

The district court’s denial of a discovery motion is reviewed for abuse of discretion. E.g., Goetz v. Crosson, 41 F.3d 800, 805 (2d Cir.1994). Here, the district court’s denial of Mount’s belated discovery requests, even assuming they were properly submitted, did not constitute such an abuse.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Goetz v. Crosson
41 F.3d 800 (Second Circuit, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
85 F. App'x 245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mounts-v-goldman-sachs-inc-ca2-2004.