Acevedo v. Harvard Maintenance Company et al

Filing 28

CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 27 Memorandum & Opinion in favor of Harvard Maintenance Company, Servete Draztti against Marcos Acevedo. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion & Order dated March 31, 2021, Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part. The following claims are dismissed with prejudice: the NYCHRL against both defendants, the ADEA claims against both defendants, the Title VII claims against Defendant Drazhi . The motion to dismiss is converted into a motion for summary judgment as to the Title VII claim against Harvard Maintenance, and the motion is GRANTED to the extent that the claims are predicated on Plaintiff's termination. The motion is de nied as to the Title VII claim to the extent that it is based on acts other than Plaintiff's termination, but Defendant's alternative motion to compel arbitration is granted as to that claim. The Court thus dismisses the case in favor of arbitration as to the remaining claim. The Court finds pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962); accordingly, this case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 3/31/2021) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------X Marcos Acevedo, Plaintiff, 20 CIVIL 721 (AJN) -against- JUDGMENT Harvard Maintenance Co., et al., Defendants. -----------------------------------------------------------X It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion & Order dated March 31, 2021, Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part. The following claims are dismissed with prejudice: the NYCHRL against both defendants, the ADEA claims against both defendants, the Title VII claims against Defendant Drazhi. The motion to dismiss is converted into a motion for summary judgment as to the Title VII claim against Harvard Maintenance, and the motion is GRANTED to the extent that the claims are predicated on Plaintiff's termination. The motion is denied as to the Title VII claim to the extent that it is based on acts other than Plaintiff's termination, but Defendant's alternative motion to compel arbitration is granted as to that claim. The Court thus dismisses the case in favor of arbitration as to the remaining claim. The Court finds pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962); accordingly, this case is closed. Dated: New York, New York March 31, 2021 RUBY J. KRAJICK _________________________ Clerk of Court BY: _________________________ Deputy Clerk

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?