18 results for 'judge:"Abrams "'.
J. Abrams partially dismisses an employee's claims stemming from the hotel's alleged unlawful withholding of his deferred-compensation funds, which he claims it used to cover operating expenses. He cannot pierce the corporate veil to hold any individual hotel officer liable but may pursue a conversion claim on the $382,000 debt alleged owed to him.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Abrams, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv775, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Corporations, Employment, Conversion
J. Abrams rejects a plaintiff's objections to the consolidation of these three securities class actions against the defendant company. However, its objection to the current lead plaintiff for the consolidated action are persuasive, and the objector shall be substituted as lead plaintiff for the class' Securities Act claims and granted approval of its selected law firms as lead counsel.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Abrams, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2789, NOS: Securities/Commodities/Exchange - Other Suits, Categories: Fraud, Securities, Class Action
J. Abrams grants the employer's motion to dismiss the employee's securities fraud claims. The employee does not allege that the employer misrepresented the value of its stock or misrepresented attributes of the stock that would induce an investor to buy. Rather, the alleged misrepresentations solely concern the vesting of options as related to the employee's position. The employee's race discrimination claims may proceed.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Abrams, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2591, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Securities
J. Abrams finds for IBM and dismisses a class action alleging age discrimination against age 60+ employees at an IBM spin-off company, Kyndryl. The employees cannot show that IBM is the spin-off company's "alter ego," as the companies do not operate as a single economic entity, nor does IBM exercise dominion over its spin-off. However, the class members may sue Kyndryl itself over its alleged practice of targeting older employees for layoff.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Abrams, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv3962, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Class Action
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Abrams partially finds for the correctional officers, ruling that New York prisons have an unconstitutional practice of denying officers' requests for a religious accommodation to wear a beard. It is well-settled law that the officers - three Muslims and one practitioner of Norse paganism - are not required to prove their claim that wearing a beard is a requirement of their faith. Rather, the state may only deny an application for a religious accommodation if it determines the applicant does not have a sincerely held religious belief, or if granting the request would impose undue hardship on the prison system.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Abrams, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: 1:19cv7977, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Employment
J. Abrams dismisses the North Carolina company's claim that the investment service had to pay back a $100,000 loan for a promised principal sum of $200,000, or otherwise double the amount loaned. The original complaint was dismissed because the loan contract was unenforceable due to it charging "a criminally usurious interest rate," but the North Carolina company did not establish any "special relationship" between itself and the opposing parties that would make the loan contract an exemption under law.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Abrams, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv6528, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract
J. Abrams finds that a consent order in a separate case protecting Muslim correctional officers who want to wear a beard as an expression of their religious beliefs should not be extended to police trainees. The plaintiff in this case is not a correctional employee, so he is not privy to the consent order, but seeks to begin the police academy with a three-inch beard. However, he has failed to establish he will suffer irreparable harm without an injunction, as he has an adequate alternative remedy in the form of damages.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Abrams, Filed On: May 26, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv1452, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, First Amendment