From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Minichiello v. Supper Club

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 23, 1998
251 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 23, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.).


Plaintiff alleges that he was verbally and physically harassed by defendants and then, when he refused voluntarily to give up his position as an employee at defendant Supper Club, wrongfully discharged. The complaint asserts causes of action for unlawful discharge pursuant to section 8-107 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York; defamation; assault and battery as part of a concerted plan to drive plaintiff from his employment; and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Although the IAS Court properly dismissed, either in whole or part, the claims for defamation, assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress, the court erred in releasing Theising as a defendant in the lawsuit. Pursuant to Administrative Code § 8-107 (13) (b), an employer with supervisory responsibility may be held accountable for the unlawful discriminatory practice of an employee or agent, and the record raises issues of fact as to whether Theising was not merely an investor in defendant Supper Club but a principal in its operation and, if so, whether he was culpably involved in the effort to wrongfully compel plaintiff to leave his employment.

The arguments raised by defendants in their appeal from the denial of their application to limit their exposure to punitive damages were advanced for the first time in reply papers, and are accordingly not entitled to appellate review at this time ( Scherrer v. Time Equities, 218 A.D.2d 116, 120-121; Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v. Morse Shoe Co., 218 A.D.2d 624, 625-626). Were we to consider defendants' arguments, we would find them to be without merit since this Court has already rejected the limitation upon punitive damages defendants propose ( see, Walsh v. Covenant House, 244 A.D.2d 214; Hirschfeld v. Institutional Investor, 208 A.D.2d 380; Bracker v. Cohen, 204 A.D.2d 115).

We have considered the parties' remaining arguments for affirmative relief and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Lerner, P. J., Rubin, Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

Minichiello v. Supper Club

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 23, 1998
251 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Minichiello v. Supper Club

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN MINICHIELLO, Appellant, v. SUPPER CLUB et al., Respondents, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 23, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
674 N.Y.S.2d 369

Citing Cases

Boyce v. Spitzer

Plaintiffs claim defendant violated New York Executive Law § 296(1)(a) and New York City Administrative Code…

Boyce v. Spitzer

NY Exec. Law § 296(1)(a); Patrowich v. Chemical Bank, 63 NY2d 541, 543-44 (1984); Pepler v. Coyne , 33 AD3d…