The Employment Law Reporter: Winter 2024

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

• A federal district court in New York has dismissed employment discrimination claims brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, finding that the plaintiff failed to meet the requirements for asserting claims under those statutes.
• The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed claims brought by a disabled male veteran against the S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Merit System Protection Board.
• The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed a plaintiff’s employment discrimination lawsuit asserting claims for violations of his rights under the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
• A federal district court in New York has dismissed the federal employment discrimination claims brought against a college in New York by a former employee after she failed to demonstrate that she had complied with the college’s COVID-19 booster mandate.
• The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has ruled that the allegations in an employment discrimination lawsuit against Columbia University were inadequate and that the complaint should be dismissed unless the plaintiff filed a satisfactory amended complaint.
• The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has ruled that the allegations in an employment discrimination lawsuit against Columbia University were inadequate and that the complaint should be dismissed unless the plaintiff filed a satisfactory amended complaint.
• Reversing a trial court’s decision, an appellate court in New York has dismissed a plaintiff’s claim for tortious interference with prospective business relations that arose after a dispute over a non-compete provision in an employment agreement.
• The New York Appellate Division, Second Department, has affirmed a trial court’s decision dismissing claims for tortious interference with a business relationshipand intentional infliction of emotional distress in a case involving an alleged breach of a non-competition agreement.
• In a case involving a dispute between golfer Jack Nicklaus and the company for which he received $145 million to create and lead, Nicklaus Companies, LLC, the trial court found that the defendants should be preliminarily enjoined from infringing intellectual property rights that were conveyed to Nicklaus Companies, including various trademarks and the exclusive right to license Nicklaus’ name, image, and likeness. After issuing that ruling, the trial court rejected the defendants’ motion to vacate the preliminary injunction.

Kenneth A. Novikoff