Cases

Guzman v City of New York (2024 NY Slip Op 03456) Guzman v City of New York 2024 NY Slip Op 03456 Decided on June 25, 2024 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431

Guzman v City of New York (2021 NY Slip Op 00085) Guzman v City of New York 2021 NY Slip Op 00085 Decided on January 07, 2021 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuan

Guzman v City of New York (2021 NY Slip Op 00085) Guzman v City of New York 2021 NY Slip Op 00085 Decided on January 07, 2021 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuan

Guzman v City of New York (2019 NY Slip Op 03273) Guzman v City of New York 2019 NY Slip Op 03273 Decided on April 30, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GREGORY H. WOODS, District Judge: Plaintiff Jessenia Guzman brought this employment discrimination action against the City of New York, the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”), and various individual defendants, alleging that Defendants discriminated against her based on her race, color, gender, and pregnancy, retaliated against her, and created a hostile work

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered March 5, 2012, confirming an arbitration award, dated May 4, 2011, which terminated petitioner’s employment as a public school teacher upon a finding that she engaged in a fraudulent scheme to enroll her granddaughter in public school using a false address, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to Education Law § 3020-a and CFLR article 75, unanimously

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered March 5, 2012, confirming an arbitration award, dated May 4, 2011, which terminated petitioner’s employment as a public school teacher upon a finding that she engaged in a fraudulent scheme to enroll her granddaughter in public school using a false address, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to Education Law § 3020-a and CFLR article 75, unanimously

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered March 5, 2012, confirming an arbitration award, dated May 4, 2011, which terminated petitioner’s employment as a public school teacher upon a finding that she engaged in a fraudulent scheme to enroll her granddaughter in public school using a false address, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to Education Law § 3020-a and CPLR article 75, unanimously mod

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered March 5, 2012, confirming an arbitration award, dated May 4, 2011, which terminated petitioner’s employment as a public school teacher upon a finding that she engaged in a fraudulent scheme to enroll her granddaughter in public school using a false address, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to Education Law § 3020-a and CPLR article 75, unanimously mod

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George D. Salerno, J.), entered on or about May 7, 2009, which, insofar as appealed *571from as limited by the briefs, in this action for personal injuries, granted defendant Board of Education’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Dismissal of the complaint was proper in thi

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for false arrest and malicious prosecution, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated September 5, 1995, as, after a nonjury trial, awarded the plaintiff the principal sum of $35,000 in compensatory damages for malicious prosecution and the principal sum of $100,000 in compensatory damages for false arrest.

— Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Herbert Shapiro, J.), entered June 11, 1990, which, inter alia, granted the defendant City of New York’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs. While incarcerated, plaintiff sent a summons by certified mail notifying defendant of plaintiff’s tort action. Receipt of the summons and knowledge of the action by the City did no

Guzman v New York City Tr. Auth. (2018 NY Slip Op 04310) Guzman v New York City Tr. Auth. 2018 NY Slip Op 04310 Decided on June 13, 2018 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bu

Arnold L. Fein, J. This is a motion by defendant for a protective order vacating items 1 through 6, 8, 14 and 16 through 20 of the notice of discovery and inspection served by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs’ notice essentially seeks production of the personnel records and file of one Frank Thompson, a police officer in the Police Department of the City of New York, who allegedly shot the plaintiff Bradfield Guzman on March 16, 1973. The

Determination of respondent, dated March 25, 2009, approving the decision of the hearing officer, which denied petitioner’s remaining family member grievance, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Marcy S. Friedman, J.], entered February 24, 2010), dismissed, without costs. The determination has a rational

*602The plaintiff, an infant, was injured when a door at his school closed on his thumb as he was exiting the school with the rest of his class. At trial, after the plaintiff and his mother testified, the plaintiff rested and the defendant moved to dismiss the action for failure to prove a prima facie case. That motion was granted, and the plaintiff appeals. We affirm. While a sc

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed as untimely (see CPLR 5513 [b]; Eaton v State of New York, 76 NY2d 824 [1990]).

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated November 24, 2003, as granted the separate motions of the defendants New York City Transit Authority, M.A.B.S.T.O.A., and Alisa T. McCullough, and the defendants Santa Fe Transportation, Inc., and Peter L. Pierro for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, on the gr

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert Straus, J.), entered July 23, 2002, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant New York City Housing Authority’s motion to dismiss the complaint for plaintiffs failure to comply with appellant’s demands for physical and oral examinations pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Plaintiff provided a reasonable excuse for her f

OPINION AND ORDER Shira A. Scheindlin, U.S.DJ. I. INTRODUCTION Brian Wynn, John Williams, Awilda Guzman, Jose Otero, and Kevin Fulton (the “Named Plaintiffs”) bring this action alleging that their employer, the New York City Housing Authority (“NYCHA”), has been systematically under-compensating them due to their race and/or ethnicity. Plaintiffs assert causes of action for violations of