Borawski v. Abulafia
| Decision Date | 08 June 2016 |
| Citation | 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 04375,33 N.Y.S.3d 412,140 A.D.3d 817 |
| Parties | Dorota BORAWSKI, etc., appellant, v. Ovadia ABULAFIA, etc., et al., respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
140 A.D.3d 817
33 N.Y.S.3d 412
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 04375
Dorota BORAWSKI, etc., appellant,
v.
Ovadia ABULAFIA, etc., et al., respondents.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
June 8, 2016.
Law Office of Dean T. Cho, LLC, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Steven C. Wu, Matthew W. Grieco, and Andrew Rhys Davies of counsel), for respondents.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, SHERI S. ROMAN, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for unlawful retaliation in violation of Executive Law § 296, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Agate, J.), dated May 19, 2014, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the
cause of action alleging unlawful retaliation in violation of Executive Law § 296.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff, who is an obstetrician and gynecologist formerly employed by the defendant SUNY Downstate Medical Center (hereinafter SUNY Downstate), commenced this action against SUNY Downstate and one of its employees, Ovadia Abulafia. In her complaint, the plaintiff alleged, among other things, that the defendants unlawfully retaliated against her in violation of Executive Law § 296 for filing a complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights (hereinafter the SDHR), in which she complained that the defendants terminated her fellowship training program after she raised concerns about long work hours and patient safety. After joinder of issue and discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging unlawful retaliation in violation of Executive Law § 296. The Supreme Court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appeals.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the legal argument made by the defendants' counsel in support of a prior motion does not constitute a judicial admission (see Lipco Elec. Corp. v. ASG Consulting Corp., 117 A.D.3d 688, 689, 984 N.Y.S.2d 619 ; Naughton v. City of New York, 94 A.D.3d 1, 12, 940 N.Y.S.2d 21 ; Rahman v. Smith, 40 A.D.3d 613, 614–615, 835 N.Y.S.2d 404 ). Moreover, the law of the case doctrine is inapplicable where, as here, a summary judgment
motion follows a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) for failure to state a cause of action (see 191 Chrystie LLC v. Ledoux, 82 A.D.3d 681, 682, 920 N.Y.S.2d 324 ; Bernard v. Grenci, 48 A.D.3d 722, 724, 853...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hersh v. Hersh (In re Hersh)
...did not require the Surrogate's Court to disregard the extremely voluminous record developed at trial (see e.g. Borawski v. Abulafia, 140 A.D.3d 817, 818, 33 N.Y.S.3d 412 ; Bernard v. Grenci, 48 A.D.3d 722, 724, 853 N.Y.S.2d 168 ). Moreover, the petitioner failed to prove all elements of th......
-
In re Hersh
... ... Court to disregard the extremely voluminous record developed ... at trial (see e.g. Borawski v Abulafia, 140 A.D.3d ... 817, 818; Bernard v Grenci, 48 A.D.3d 722, 724) ... Moreover, ... the petitioner failed to ... ...
-
347 Cent. Park Assocs., LLC v. Pine Top Assocs., LLC
...judgment motion follows a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) for failure to state a cause of action (see Borawski v. Abulafia, 140 A.D.3d 817, 33 N.Y.S.3d 412 ; Bernard v. Grenci, 48 A.D.3d 722, 724, 853 N.Y.S.2d 168 ; State of New York v. Barclays Bank of N.Y., 151 A.D.2d 19, 54......
-
Langton v. Warwick Valley Cent. Sch. Dist.
...action (see Forrest v. Jewish Guild for the Blind, 3 N.Y.3d 295, 313, 786 N.Y.S.2d 382, 819 N.E.2d 998 ; see also Borawski v. Abulafia, 140 A.D.3d 817, 33 N.Y.S.3d 412 ; Calhoun v. County of Herkimer, 114 A.D.3d 1304, 1306, 980 N.Y.S.2d 664 ). “To establish its entitlement to summary judgme......