Opinion
2015-10-22
Dolly RAGOO, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Kreisberg & Maitland, LLP, New York (Jeffrey L. Kreisberg of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Diana Lawless of counsel), for respondents.
Kreisberg & Maitland, LLP, New York (Jeffrey L. Kreisberg of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Diana Lawless of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered February 13, 2014, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint asserting causes of action for retaliation and disability discrimination by failure to accommodate under the New York State Human Rights Law (State HRL), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff's transfer from defendant Taxi and Limousine Commission's (TLC) office in Manhattan, to its office in Long Island City, Queens, and corresponding reassignment from the position of administrative assistant to TLC's First Deputy Commissioner to administrative assistant to TLC's Chief Administrative Law Judge was not an adverse employment action under the State HRL ( see Forrest v. Jewish Guild for the Blind, 3 N.Y.3d 295, 312–313, 786 N.Y.S.2d 382, 819 N.E.2d 998 [2004] ). Even assuming that the transfer and reassignment resulted in a change of plaintiff's duties, the transfer was at most “an alteration of her responsibilities, and not an adverse employment action” (Silvis v. City of New York, 95 A.D.3d 665, 665, 946 N.Y.S.2d 22 [1st Dept.2012] [internal quotation marks omitted], lv. denied20 N.Y.3d 861, 2013 WL 1150296 [2013] ), as she “retained the terms and conditions of her employment, and her salary remained the same” ( Matter of Block v. Gatling, 84 A.D.3d 445, 445, 922 N.Y.S.2d 327 [1st Dept.2011], 17 N.Y.3d 709, 2011 WL 4089761 [2011] ).
Furthermore, assuming that plaintiff's medical condition constituted a “disability” for purposes of the State HRL ( seeExecutive Law §§ 292[21], 292[21–e] ), denying her request to be assigned to a specific work location does not constitute a refusal to make a reasonable accommodation for her disability ( see Porter v. City of New York, 128 A.D.3d 448, 6 N.Y.S.3d 483 [1st Dept.2015] ). SWEENY, J.P., RENWICK, SAXE, GISCHE, JJ., concur.