Adjunct Law Prof Blog

Editor: Mitchell H. Rubinstein
New York Law School

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Witness Named, But Not Called Protected From Retaliation


Noho Star, Inc. v. NYS Division of Human Rights, ___A.D3d___(1st Dep't. April 6, 2010), is an interesting case. The case involves the discharge of cook. However, I bring it to your attention to highlight that a witness who was named, but not called to testify, was protected under the anti-retaliation provisions of the New York Human Rights Law. Additionally, defendant claimed that the plaintiffs damages should be reduced by the amount of unemployment. That claim was rejected because no evidence about unemployment was admitted at trial.

Mitchell H. Rubinstein

Employment Discrimination | Permalink


Post a comment