Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Maria HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF NEW YORK, INC., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mary Ann Brigantti-Hughes, J.), entered March 19, 2008, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action to the extent of dismissing the causes of action for constructive discharge and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and granted defendants' motion for summary judgment to the extent of dismissing the causes of action for retaliation, hostile work environment and quid pro quo sexual harassment, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny defendants' motion for summary judgment in its entirety, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
Defendants failed to demonstrate good cause for the late filing of their motion for summary judgment (CPLR 3212[a]; Brill v. City of New York, 2 N.Y.3d 648, 781 N.Y.S.2d 261, 814 N.E.2d 431 [2004] ).
The complaint fails to state a cause of action for constructive discharge since it contains no allegation that plaintiff resigned from her job (see Whidbee v. Garzarelli Food Specialties, Inc., 223 F.3d 62, 73 [2000] ). It fails to state a cause of action for either intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress because the conduct it alleges as to defendant Marcelino is not “so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community” (see Murphy v. American Home Prods. Corp., 58 N.Y.2d 293, 303, 461 N.Y.S.2d 232, 448 N.E.2d 86 [1983] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: June 02, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)