Reinach v. Wisehart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reinach v. Wisehart

209 A.D.2d 332, 619 N.Y.S.2d 14

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 22, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 209 A.D.2d 332 (Reinach v. Wisehart) 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.

Bluebook

Reinach v. Wisehart, 209 A.D.2d 332, 619 N.Y.S.2d 14 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered May 17, 1993, upon a verdict, inter alia, awarding damages in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the amount of $12,500 for mental anguish caused by religious discrimination, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Upon review of the record, we find that the evidence supports the jury’s finding that defendant terminated plaintiff’s employment because of plaintiff’s sabbath observance in violation of Executive Law § 296 (10) (see, Matter of Schweizer Aircraft Corp. v State Div. of Human Rights, 48 NY2d 294), and that the award of $12,500 for mental anguish does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (compare, Kelley v Analytab Prods., 204 AD2d 113). Nor did the after-acquired evidence of plaintiff’s resume fraud entitle defendant to judgment as a matter of law (see, Moodie v Federal Reserve Bank, 831 F Supp 333, 336).

We have considered defendant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ross, J. P., Asch, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered May 17, 1993, upon a verdict, inter alia, awarding damages in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the amount of $12,500 for mental anguish caused by religious discrimination, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Upon review of the record, we find that the evidence supports the jury’s finding that defendant terminated plaintiff’s employment because of plaintiff’s sabbath observance in violation of Executive Law § 296 (10) (see, Matter of Schweizer Aircraft Corp. v State Div. of Human Rights, 48 NY2d 294), and that the award of $12,500 for mental anguish does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (compare, Kelley v Analytab Prods., 204 AD2d 113). Nor did the after-acquired evidence of plaintiff’s resume fraud entitle defendant to judgment as a matter of law (see, Moodie v Federal Reserve Bank, 831 F Supp 333, 336).

We have considered defendant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ross, J. P., Asch, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 332, 619 N.Y.S.2d 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reinach-v-wisehart-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack