Sanacore v. HSBC Securities (USA), Inc.
Opinion of the Court
Defendant established prima facie that it terminated plaintiff not because of his disability but for the legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons that he was insubordinate in refusing to implement certain new administrative and monitoring initiatives and that he had lied about obtaining the required pre-approval for two large transactions. In opposition, plaintiff raised an issue of fact whether defendant’s proffered reasons for terminating him were pretextual (see Ferrante v American Lung Assn., 90 NY2d 623, 629-630 [1997]). He showed, among other things, that he was rated as being in compliance with certain of the business metrics that defendant claims he resisted and that other financial advisors had violated the pre-approval requirement for large transactions without any adverse consequence.
We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Saxe, DeGrasse, Freedman and Román, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.