Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 130 views

    Kathy Coraggio v. Time Inc. Magazine Company, Time Warner, Inc., Karen Magee, Lisa Pols, 108 F.3d 329, 2d Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants on plaintiff's claims of pregnancy discrimination under Title VII and related state law claims. The appeals court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims after dismissing the sole federal claim, as the state law claims in this case were controlled by established precedent from Title VII case law.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Kathy Coraggio v. Time Inc. Magazine Company, Time Warner, Inc., Karen Magee, Lisa Pols, 108 F.3d 329, 2d Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    130 views3 pages
    This document is a summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants on plaintiff's claims of pregnancy discrimination under Title VII and related state law claims. The appeals court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims after dismissing the sole federal claim, as the state law claims in this case were controlled by established precedent from Title VII case law.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-03-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 108 F.3d 329 Docket: 96-74

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is a summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants on plaintiff's claims of pregnancy discrimination under Title VII and related state law claims. The appeals court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims after dismissing the sole federal claim, as the state law claims in this case were controlled by established precedent from Title VII case law.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    130 views3 pages

    Kathy Coraggio v. Time Inc. Magazine Company, Time Warner, Inc., Karen Magee, Lisa Pols, 108 F.3d 329, 2d Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants on plaintiff's claims of pregnancy discrimination under Title VII and related state law claims. The appeals court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims after dismissing the sole federal claim, as the state law claims in this case were controlled by established precedent from Title VII case law.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    108 F.

    3d 329

    NOTICE: THIS SUMMARY ORDER MAY NOT BE CITED


    AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY, BUT MAY BE CALLED
    TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT
    STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY
    CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR
    RES JUDICATA. SEE SECOND CIRCUIT RULE 0.23.
    Kathy CORAGGIO, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    TIME INC. MAGAZINE COMPANY, Time Warner, Inc.,
    Karen Magee,
    Lisa Pols, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 96-74.

    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.


    March 6, 1997.

    APPEARING FOR APPELLANT: GARY E. ROTH, Leib, Kraus,


    Grispin & Roth, Scotch Plains, New Jersey (Richard M. Cohen, of
    counsel).
    APPEARING FOR APPELLEES: BRUCE S. KAPLAN, Friedman &
    Kaplan, New York, New York (Robert D. Kaplan, Robert S. Loigman,
    Friedman & Kaplan, Robert E. McCarthy, Paul G. Gardephe, Stephen
    Keyes, Time Inc., on the brief).
    Before GRAAFEILAND, MESKILL and CABRANES, Circuit Judges.

    This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from the United
    States District Court for the Southern District of New York and was argued.

    ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,


    ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court be and it
    hereby is AFFIRMED.

    Plaintiff appeals from an order of the United States District Court for the
    Southern District of New York, granting defendants' motion for summary
    judgment on plaintiff's claims of pregnancy discrimination under the Pregnancy
    Discrimination Act of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e(k), pregnancy
    discrimination under New York law and marital status discrimination under
    New York law. Plaintiff contends that the district court erred when in granted
    summary judgment to defendants on her Title VII claim and her New York state
    law claims, and that the district court further erred when it adjudicated her state
    law claims after dismissal of her Title VII claim.

    We affirm the judgment of the district court granting the defendants' motion for
    summary judgment for substantially the reasons stated in the district court's
    opinion and order dated March 27, 1996. See Coraggio v. Time Inc. Magazine
    Co., No. 94 Civ. 5429, 1996 WL 139786 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 27, 1996). We write
    here only to consider whether the district court erred when it adjudicated
    plaintiff's state law claims after it decided to dismiss her only federal claim.

    We review the district court's exercise of pendent jurisdiction over plaintiff's


    state law claims notwithstanding its decision to dismiss plaintiff's federal claim
    for abuse of discretion. See Raucci v. Town of Rotterdam, 902 F.2d 1050, 1054
    (2d Cir.1990). While the failure to dismiss a pendent claim after dismissing a
    federal claim may, in some circumstances, be an abuse of discretion, "the
    dismissal of pendent claims is not always required when federal claims in an
    action are dismissed." Id.; see also Baylis v. Marriott Corp., 843 F.2d 658, 66465 (2d Cir.1988). Instead, "[t]he court must consider and weigh in each case,
    and at every stage of the litigation, the values of judicial economy,
    convenience, fairness, and comity in order to decide whether to exercise
    jurisdiction over the pendent claim." Raucci, 902 F.2d at 1055.

    We have frequently upheld summary judgments with respect to both state and
    federal claims in cases brought under Title VII and corresponding state
    discrimination laws. See, e.g., Van Zant v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 80 F.3d
    708, 715 (2d Cir.1996); Stetson v. NYNEX Serv. Co., 995 F.2d 355 (2d
    Cir.1993). Plaintiff relies principally on Morse v. University of Vermont, 973
    F.2d 122 (2d Cir.1992), in which we held that the district court abused its
    discretion by exercising pendent jurisdiction over a state law claim that
    required the court to resolve an undecided question of state law. Id. at 127-28.
    Here, in contrast, plaintiff's state law claims are controlled by established
    precedent derived from Title VII case law. See Miller Brewery Co. v. State
    Div'n of Human Rights, 498 N.Y.S.2d 776, 777-78 (N.Y.1985).
    Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it

    Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it
    exercised pendent jurisdiction over plaintiff's state law claims and dismissed
    those claims on the merits, notwithstanding its decision to dismiss plaintiff's
    federal claim.

    We have considered all of the plaintiff's arguments on appeal and find them to
    be without merit.

    Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is hereby AFFIRMED.

    You might also like