Opinion
2014-07-3
Thomas TOTH, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF CITYWIDE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, Defendant–Respondent.
Kreisberg & Maitland, LLP, New York (Jeffrey L. Kreisberg of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jonathan A. Popolow of counsel), for respondent.
Kreisberg & Maitland, LLP, New York (Jeffrey L. Kreisberg of counsel), for appellant.Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jonathan A. Popolow of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered May 29, 2013, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Construing the complaint liberally, presuming its factual allegations to be true, and according the complaint the benefit of every possible favorable inference ( see Vig v. New York Hairspray Co., L.P., 67 A.D.3d 140, 144–145, 885 N.Y.S.2d 74 [1st Dept.2009];511 W. 232nd Owners Corp. v. Jennifer Realty Co., 98 N.Y.2d 144, 151–152, 746 N.Y.S.2d 131, 773 N.E.2d 496 [2002] ), plaintiff has not adequately pled or established a recognized disability under either the State or City Human Rights Law (HRL) (see Executive Law § 292(21); Administrative Code of City of N.Y. § 8–102(16)(b)). His medical proof only established that he was extremely anxious and stressed because of his daughter's medical condition. Plaintiff also failed to adequately plead discriminatory animus which is fatal to his discrimination claims under the State and City HRL ( see Matter of McEniry v. Landi, 84 N.Y.2d 554, 558, 620 N.Y.S.2d 328, 644 N.E.2d 1019 [1994] ).
We note that defendant agency is not a proper party (see N.Y. City Charter § 396). FRIEDMAN, J.P., SWEENY, ANDRIAS, SAXE, KAPNICK, JJ., concur.