Alexandra York v. Association of the Bar of the City of New York

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that financial benefits must meet a minimum level of “significance” to qualify as remuneration
• holding that under New York State and New York City laws, party who has chosen to bring claims before DHR may not then bring those claims in court
• explaining that when the language or one statute is “nearly identical” to that of another “discussion of the latter applies equally to the former”
• explaining that plaintiff who received “merely incidental” benefits of clerical support and networking as part of her volunteer position did not allege employer-employee relationship for Title VII purposes
• explaining that NYSHRL claims, once brought in the NYSDHR, “may not be brought again as a plenary action in another court” and may be appealed “only to the Supreme Court of State of New York” (citations omitted)
• discussing election of remedies argument as grounded in the text of the NYSHRL and NYCHRL

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).