Wiesen v. New York University
Decision Date | 24 April 2003 |
Citation | 758 N.Y.S.2d 51,304 A.D.2d 459 |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Parties | JEREMY WIESEN, Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>NEW YORK UNIVERSITY, Respondent, et al., Defendants. |
Initially, we find that the motion court erred when it converted defendant's CPLR 3211 motion to one for summary judgment. CPLR 3211 (c) provides, in pertinent part: (Emphasis added.)
There are, however, three exceptions to the notice requirement: (1) where the action in question involves no issue of fact, but only issues of law which are fully acknowledged and argued by the parties; (2) where the parties specifically request the motion be treated as one for summary judgment; and (3) where the parties deliberately lay bare their proof and make it clear they are charting a summary judgment course (Mihlovan v Grozavu, 72 NY2d 506, 508 [1988]; Shah v Shah, 215 AD2d 287, 289 [1995]; Four Seasons Hotels v Vinnik, 127 AD2d 310, 320 [1987]).
Here, there is no indication that the court gave notice to the parties of its intent to treat the motion as a motion for summary judgment. Moreover, none of the delineated exceptions apply in this matter, and the fact that defendant, almost as an aside, unilaterally requested summary judgment as alternative relief does not constitute adequate notice so as to comply with CPLR 3211 (c) ( ).
On a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211, the court must "accept the facts as alleged in the complaint as true, accord plaintiffs the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory" (Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]; Peisinger Creative Branding Sys. v CBS Cable Networks, 299 AD2d 184 [2002]; Molina v Phoenix Sound, 297 AD2d 595, 596 [2002]).
In order to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination pursuant to Executive Law § 296, plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she was a member of the class protected by the statute; was actively or constructively discharged; was qualified to hold the position from which he or she was terminated; and the discharge occurred under circumstances which give rise to an inference of age discrimination (Ferrante v American Lung Assn., 90 NY2d 623, 629 [1997]; Terranova v Liberty Lines Tr., 292 AD2d 441, 442 [2002]). The plaintiff's burden has...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Jones v. Rochdale Vill., Inc.
...the requirement of CPLR 3211(c)” ( Mihlovan v. Grozavu, 72 N.Y.2d at 508, 534 N.Y.S.2d 656, 531 N.E.2d 288 n.;see Wiesen v. New York Univ., 304 A.D.2d 459, 460, 758 N.Y.S.2d 51). Moreover, the motion did not exclusively involve “a purely legal question rather than any issues of fact” ( Mihl......
-
McGivney v. Sobel, Ross, Fliegel & Suss, LLP
...68 A.D.3d 622, 623-24 (1st Dep't 2009); Chuqui v. Church of St. Margaret Mary, 39 A.D.3d 397 (1st Dep't 2007); Wiesen v. New York Univ., 304 A.D.2d 459, 460 (1st Dep't 2003). The court may treat a motion to dismiss as one for summary judgment when both parties request such treatment, delibe......
-
Davis v. Lancaster
...E.g., Nonnon v. City of New York, 9 N.Y.3d 825, 827, 842 N.Y.S.2d 756, 874 N.E.2d 720 (2007); Wiesen v. New York Univ., 304 A.D.2d 459, 460, 758 N.Y.S.2d 51, 304 A.D.2d 459 (1st Dep't 2003);MacDonald v. Prudential Sec., 247 A.D.2d 346, 347, 669 N.Y.S.2d 207 (1st Dep't 1998); Four Seasons Ho......
-
People ex rel. Cuomo v. First Am. Corp.
...inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory' " ( Wiesen v. New York Univ., 304 A.D.2d 459, 460, 758 N.Y.S.2d 51 [2003], quoting Leon v. Martinez, 84 N.Y.2d 83, 87-88, 614 N.Y.S.2d 972, 638 N.E.2d 511 [1994] ). The Attorney General's comp......