District Judge I. Leo Glasser

 

Read Full-Text Decision

Born in 1952 Moza, a Coptic Christian of Egyptian origin, received his medical degree in Egypt. In 2008 he was hired by Kings County Hosp. Ctr. (KCHC) as an assistant director of risk management, a title he share with three other employees of Haitian descent. In 2013, Moza was placed on a performance improvement plan (PIP) to address performance issues. Employment was terminated in September 2013, and he was replaced by a much younger doctor of Haitian descent. District court granted New York City’s Health and Hosp. Corp., KCHC, and their codefendants summary judgment in Moza’s lawsuit claiming he was fired because of his race, ethnicity, national origin, and age in violation of 42 USC §§1981 and 1983, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Although Moza established a prima facie case of discrimination under §§1981 and 1983, Defendants had a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for firing Moza for poor performance, which Moza did not show was a pretext. Moza’s deteriorating performance was documented in three evaluations identifying problematic behaviors and in testimony by his former supervisors. Discriminatory animus could not be inferred from supervisor Woll’s “stray remarks” about Moza’s religion.

District Judge I. Leo Glasser

 

Read Full-Text Decision

Born in 1952 Moza, a Coptic Christian of Egyptian origin, received his medical degree in Egypt. In 2008 he was hired by Kings County Hosp. Ctr. (KCHC) as an assistant director of risk management, a title he share with three other employees of Haitian descent. In 2013, Moza was placed on a performance improvement plan (PIP) to address performance issues. Employment was terminated in September 2013, and he was replaced by a much younger doctor of Haitian descent. District court granted New York City’s Health and Hosp. Corp., KCHC, and their codefendants summary judgment in Moza’s lawsuit claiming he was fired because of his race, ethnicity, national origin, and age in violation of 42 USC §§1981 and 1983, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Although Moza established a prima facie case of discrimination under §§1981 and 1983, Defendants had a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for firing Moza for poor performance, which Moza did not show was a pretext. Moza’s deteriorating performance was documented in three evaluations identifying problematic behaviors and in testimony by his former supervisors. Discriminatory animus could not be inferred from supervisor Woll’s “stray remarks” about Moza’s religion.