Taverna v. Microchip Technology, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- King v. Brooklyn Sports Club (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- German v. Bruins Transportation, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
—In an action, inter alla, pursuant to Executive Law § 296 to recover damages for employment discrimination, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J.), dated September 23, 1998, as granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was to dismiss the cause of action to recover damages for unlawful employment discrimination pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7)
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
It is well settled that on a motion to dismiss a pleading for failure to state a cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), the pleading is to be liberally construed, accepting all the facts alleged therein to be true and according the allegations the benefit of every possible favorable inference (see, Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87). Here, the court properly dismissed the cause of action to recover damages for employment discrimination, since the complaint failed to state the essential elements required for such a cause of action (see, Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v Burdine, 450 US 248, 252-253; Ferrante v American Lung Assn., 90 NY2d 623). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.