Andree J. LEOPOLD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BACCARAT, INC., Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “a simple ‘sustained’ or ‘overruled’ will ordinarily suffice” but that “[o]ur scrutiny of such an evidentiary ruling might be altered in the rare case where the record affirmatively reflects the trial court’s failure to exercise its discretion properly”
• ground not asserted in JMOL motion not considered where adversary had \no opportunity to cure any deficiency in her proof\
• evidence that “easily might have created feelings of antagonism and even disgust” admissible for probative value
• “New York courts require the same standard for claims brought under the NY[S]HRL as for those brought under Title VII.”
• “New York courts require the same standard for claims brought under the NY[S]HRL as for those brought under Title VII.”
• “Because New York courts require the same standard of proof for claims brought under the NYHRL as for those brought under Title VII, we analyze these claims in tandem.”’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).