During the past year, the Second Circuit decided three cases that guide district courts in ruling on summary judgment motions in cases brought under the federal anti-discrimination laws: Gallagher v. Delaney,139 F3d 338 (2d Cir. 1998), Norton v. Sam’s Club, 145 F3d 114 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 511 (1998) and Distasio v. Perkin Elmer Corp., 157 F3d 55 (2d Cir. 1998). Gallagherdiscouraged summary judgment in favor of jury trials and was initially viewed by some district court judges as raising the bar for the employer’s motion for summary judgment. The subsequent decisions in Nortonand Distasio, however, reaffirmed that summary judgment remains an appropriate — even mandated — remedy in the employment discrimination context when the plaintiff has failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

This article examines the impact of these three decisions on summary judgment motions in discrimination cases under the federal anti-discrimination laws in the Second Circuit.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]