Richardson et al v. City of New York
||Annette Richardson, Deborah Bowman, Liza Horsley, Debra Poe, Dino Riojas, Arlene Simmons and Stephanie Thomas
||City of New York
||December 1, 2017
||New York Southern District Court
||Foley Square Office
||J. Paul Oetken
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|September 28, 2018
OPINION AND ORDER re: 11 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint MOTION to Stay re: 4 Complaint Stay Discovery filed by City of New York. For the foregoing reasons, the City's motion to stay discovery is DENIED as m oot, Plaintiffs' claims are DISMISSED as moot to the extent they allege discrimination against EMS employees, and the City's motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs' Section 1981 and NYCHRL claims insofar as they allege pay di scrimination and as to all federal claims accruing prior to December 1, 2014. The Citys motion to dismiss, however, is DENIED as to (1) Plaintiffs' Section 1981 claims accruing after December 1, 2014, insofar as they allege a pattern or pract ice of intentional discrimination in hiring and job placement; (2) Plaintiffs' NYCHRL claims insofar as they allege a pattern or practice of intentional discrimination in hiring and job placement; (3) and Plaintiffs' NYCHRL claims insofa r as they allege that the Citys hiring and job-placement practices have a disparate impact on African Americans. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Docket Number 11. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 9/28/2018) (anc)
Access additional case information on PACER
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
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.
Why Is My Information Online?