A Manhattan state judge has taken the unusual step of allowing a former Prudential Financial employee to file an amended complaint incorporating a promissory estoppel claim against his former employer, even though he had withdrawn an allegation that the company violated New York’s whistleblower statute.
“Those who are familiar with the original complaint are aware that the previously-asserted whistleblower claim and the present promissory estoppel cause of action relate to the same background facts,” said Manhattan state Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Lowe III in Bones v. Prudential Financial, 1023396/2007. “But that prior complaint is now moot.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]