DILEK EDWARDS, Plaintiff-Appellant-res, v. CHARLES v. NICOLAI, def-res, STEPHANIE ADAMS, Defendant-res-res

4080. DILEK EDWARDS, Plaintiff-Appellant-res, v. CHARLES v. NICOLAI, def-res, STEPHANIE ADAMS, Defendant-res-res — NEW YORK CITY COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, AMICUS CURIAE. Joseph & Kirschenbaum LLP, New York (D. Maimon Kirschenbaum of counsel), for appellant-res — Golenbock Eiseman Assor Bell & Peskoe LLP, New York (Martin S. Siegel of counsel), for respondent-appellant and res — ZACHARY W. CARTER, CORPORATION COUNSEL, NEW YORK (MELANIE T. WEST OF COUNSEL), FOR AMICUS CURIAE.—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered May 13, 2016, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint to the extent of dismissing the causes of action for gender discrimination in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) and the New York City Human Rights Laws (NYCHRL), and denied the motion as to the cause of action for defamation, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny the motion as to the discrimination causes of action, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

4080. DILEK EDWARDS, Plaintiff-Appellant-res, v. CHARLES v. NICOLAI, def-res, STEPHANIE ADAMS, Defendant-res-res — NEW YORK CITY COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, AMICUS CURIAE. Joseph & Kirschenbaum LLP, New York (D. Maimon Kirschenbaum of counsel), for appellant-res — Golenbock Eiseman Assor Bell & Peskoe LLP, New York (Martin S. Siegel of counsel), for respondent-appellant and res — ZACHARY W. CARTER, CORPORATION COUNSEL, NEW YORK (MELANIE T. WEST OF COUNSEL), FOR AMICUS CURIAE.—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered May 13, 2016, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint to the extent of dismissing the causes of action for gender discrimination in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) and the New York City Human Rights Laws (NYCHRL), and denied the motion as to the cause of action for defamation, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny the motion as to the discrimination causes of action, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

As this appeal arises from defendants’ motion to dismiss, we are constrained to accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true and to accord plaintiff every favorable inference (see 511 W. 232nd Owners Corp. v. Jennifer Realty Co., 98 NY2d 144, 151-152 [2002]).

DILEK EDWARDS, Plaintiff-Appellant-res, v. CHARLES v. NICOLAI, def-res, STEPHANIE ADAMS, Defendant-res-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal