7 Cited authorities

Weinstock v. Columbia University
224 F.3d 33 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 2,466 times
Holding that "unsupported allegations do not create a material issue of fact"
Hollander v. American Cyanamid Company
172 F.3d 192 (2d Cir. 1999) Cited 247 times
Holding that the replacement of an employee within the protected class by two others, one eleven years younger and the other eight months younger, within a year of plaintiff's termination satisfied the fourth element of a prima facie case under the ADEA
United States v. Private Sanitation Industry Ass'n of Nassau/Suffolk, Inc.
44 F.3d 1082 (2d Cir. 1994) Cited 87 times
Holding "while [defendant] may well suffer irreparable harm from the divestiture of his companies, the interests of the government and the public in terminating the control of trash handling on Long Island by criminal conspirators weigh heavily against granting a stay [pending appeal]"
Epstein v. Kemper Ins. Companies
210 F. Supp. 2d 308 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) Cited 47 times
Holding that plaintiff had established a prima facie age discrimination case where there was evidence in the record that "[d]efendant set unattainable job expectations, including inadequate administrative support, unreasonable assignments, and unfair criticisms"
Borrelli v. Orange Reg'l Med. Ctr.
18 CV 270 (VB) (S.D.N.Y. May. 23, 2018)
18 CV 270 (VB) 05-23-2018 ALBA BORRELLI, Plaintiff, v. ORANGE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, LAUREN CARBERRY, and ROBIN BRENNAN-SEIBEL, Defendants. Briccetti, J. OPINION AND ORDER : Plaintiff Alba Borrelli brings this action alleging defendants Orange Regional Medical Center ("ORMC"), Lauren Carberry, and Robin Brennan-Seibel violated her rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., The Civil Rights Act of 1866 ("Section 1981"), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and
BEY v. CITY OF NEW YORK
99 Civ. 3873 (LMM) (consolidated cases). (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 14, 2009) Cited 3 times
99 Civ. 3873 (LMM) (consolidated cases). Consolidated cases include 99 Civ. 3873, 01 Civ. 8906, 01 Civ. 9406, and 04 Civ. 1572. July 14, 2009 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER LAWRENCE McKENNA, District Judge Plaintiffs Herbert Hinnant ("Hinnant"), Edward Ebanks ("Ebanks") and Michael Nichols ("Nichols"), (collectively "Plaintiffs") move to strike various portions of Defendant's Statement of Undisputed Facts pursuant to Local Rule 56.1 ("Defs.' 56.1 Statement"). 1. Plaintiffs move to exclude paragraphs 45 through
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 327,983 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Narrative Ark Entertainment LLC v. Archie Comic Publications, Inc. et al

7 Cited authorities

Weinstock v. Columbia University

Holding that "unsupported allegations do not create a material issue of fact"

Hollander v. American Cyanamid Company

Holding that the replacement of an employee within the protected class by two others, one eleven years younger and the other eight months younger, within a year of plaintiff's termination satisfied the fourth element of a prima facie case under the ADEA

United States v. Private Sanitation Industry Ass'n of Nassau/Suffolk, Inc.

Holding "while [defendant] may well suffer irreparable harm from the divestiture of his companies, the interests of the government and the public in terminating the control of trash handling on Long Island by criminal conspirators weigh heavily against granting a stay [pending appeal]"

Epstein v. Kemper Ins. Companies

Holding that plaintiff had established a prima facie age discrimination case where there was evidence in the record that "[d]efendant set unattainable job expectations, including inadequate administrative support, unreasonable assignments, and unfair criticisms"

Borrelli v. Orange Reg'l Med. Ctr.

BEY v. CITY OF NEW YORK

Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit