From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Arnold

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 25, 2010
70 A.D.3d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. 2250.

February 25, 2010.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered January 6, 2009, which granted the motion of respondents Beth Abraham Health Services, Kono, Connolly and Frazier-White to deny the petition in its entirety, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Andrew Arnold, appellant pro se.

Jones Day, New York (Terri L. Chase of counsel), for Beth Abraham Health Services, Inc., Yoni Kono, Maureen Connolly and Keri Frazier-White, respondents.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Freedman and Román, JJ.


In challenging his termination of employment, petitioner introduced his complaint to the New York State Division of Human Rights with an allegation that his employers discriminated against him based on his age. In this Court, his argument is captioned as gender-based discrimination. Nevertheless, his complaint throughout this proceeding has specified only that he was terminated for jury service. The alleged violation of an employee's right to be absent from work for jury duty (Judiciary Law § 519) does not give rise to a private right of action ( Gomariz v Foote, Cone Belding Communications, 228 AD2d 316).


Summaries of

In re Arnold

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 25, 2010
70 A.D.3d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

In re Arnold

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ANDREW ARNOLD, Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 25, 2010

Citations

70 A.D.3d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 1599
894 N.Y.S.2d 432

Citing Cases

Meyers v. Port Auth. of Trans Hudson (Path)

See Arnold v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 894 N.Y.S.2d 432 (1st Dep't. 2010); Di Blasi v.…

Arnold v. N.Y. State Div. of Human Rights

Given that this Court previously determined that the proceeding had been properly dismissed (70 A.D.3d 605,…