The Employment Law Reporter

Here is what we cover in this issue of Employment Law Reporter Spring 2022:

• The U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York has granted the defendant’s motion in an employment discrimination lawsuit brought under the federal Rehabilitation Act, finding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that he was disabled or considered to be disabled by his employer.
• The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed employment discrimination claims brought by a former employee of the New York City Transit Authority under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the New York City Human Rights Law.
• The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has rejected an employment discrimination action brought by a plaintiff against her former employer in which she asserted claims of unlawful retaliation, finding among other things that the plaintiff had not actually engaged in any protected activity that led to her dismissal.
• Explaining that there is “no individual liability” under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and that in any event the plaintiff’s complaint was filed against an individual employed by a separate entity than the plaintiff’s employer, a federal court in New York has decided that the defendant’s motion to dismiss should be granted.
• A federal district court in New York has remanded to state court a “garden-variety employment discrimination and retaliation” lawsuit that the defendant had removed to the district court. The district court concluded that the plaintiff’s complaint raised “no federal claim.”
• A trial court in New York has denied a former employee’s motion to dismiss claims brought by her former employer under a non-compete agreement and for misappropriation of confidential information. Among other things, the court ruled that the former employee failed to refute her former employer’s allegations that she breached an enforceable agreement.
• An appellate court in New York has ruled that a trial court erred when it determined that the plaintiff’s alleged breach of covenants not to compete in an employment contract constituted a defense to the defendant’s alleged default under a promissory note the defendant previously signed when she purchased business assets from the plaintiff.

Kenneth A. Novikoff