Goyette v. DCA Advertising Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that second factor favored plaintiff where “it would have been redundant for [the unnamed party] to have had its own representative at the negotiations”
• applying balancing test to “deter-min[e] whether an entity may be considered an employer within the meaning of the Human Rights Law”
• identity of interests found where plaintiffs knew the identity of the unnamed defendant but had been dissuaded from naming the unnamed party in EEOC complaint
• “In State Division of Human Rights v. GTE Corporation, 109 A.D.2d 1082, 1083, 487 N.Y.S.2d 234 (4th Dep’t 1985
• because unnamed parent corporation and named subsidiary had “always been represented by the same legal counsel,” parent corporation “by definition ... had adequate notice and representation in the EEOC proceedings”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).