Lioi v. NYC DOHMH-Publc Health Laboratory et al
| Francine Lioi |
| NYC DOHMH-Publc Health Laboratory, Martin Evans and David Haddow |
| 1:2010cv06445 |
| August 30, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Suffolk |
| Laura Taylor Swain |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
33
OPINION & ORDER re: #102705 20 FIRST MOTION for Summary Judgment, filed by David Haddow, Martin Evans, New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene. Defendants deny each of Liois claims, and now move for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a). For the reasons that follow, the Court grants defendants' motion as to Lioi's Title VII claims and declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Lioi's NYSHRL and NYCHRL claims. For the foregoing reasons , defendants' motion is granted as to Lioi's claims under Title VII. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in defendants' favor as to those claims. Because the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Lioi&# 039;s NYSHRL and NYCHRL claims, they are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket number 20, and to close this case. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 12/19/2012) (ja) Modified on 12/21/2012 (jab).
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
