Sullivan v. Chappius

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that employees of state agencies are typically not in privity with their agency employer for res judicata purposes
• dismissing claim where the plaintiff “complained about matters falling completely outside the scope of the [NYSHRL.,]” i.e., an “illicit affair” between the defendant and the plaintiff’s secretary

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).