U.S. District Court, Western District of New York Case Summaries:

Daily Record (Rochester, NY), Jul 14, 2008

U.S. District Court, Western District of New York

Job Discrimination

Individual Liability

Siddiqui v. United Financial Mortgage Corp.

06-CV-6225

Judge Telesca

Background: The plaintiff brought suit under Title VII and the New York Human Rights Law alleging the defendants discriminated against him and terminated his employment because of his race, color and national origin. The plaintiff was a loan officer at a Rochester location of the defendant and is of Bahrain descent. The plaintiff alleges remarks were made to him about his background and he was terminated in retaliation for complaining about discrimination. The plaintiff's former manager, also a named defendant, denies the plaintiff's allegations, and moves to dismiss the complaint, claiming he cannot be held personally liable under Title VII.

Ruling: The Title VII suit against the manager is dismissed, although that portion of the Title VII claim against United may go forward. The court, however, exercises supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims that allow for individual liability.

J. Nelson Thomas of Dolin, Thomas & Solomon LLP for the plaintiff, and Diane Windholz of Jackson Lewis LLP for the defendant

Settlement --Appeal

Wynn v. Wegmans Food

Markets Inc.

96-CV-6307L

Judge Larimer

Background: This suit, commenced 12 years ago, was settled for the sum of $10,000 in 1998. The plaintiff objected to certain sums deducted from the settlement check, the federal and state withholding taxes, and also requested interest on the settlement. Seven years later, in 2006, the plaintiff filed a motion to compel seeking interest on the settlement plus $5,000 as a sanction for the defendants' alleged violation of state and federal wage deduction laws. The Second Circuit found the plaintiff's appeal was not made in time.

Ruling: The court, noting questionable jurisdiction over a case settled multiple times, finds the notice of appeal untimely as it was not mailed early enough for the court to treat it either as a motion for an extension of time to file or a motion to reopen the time within which to file an appeal.

Diedre Wynn, pro se, and Lucinda Odell Lapoff of Harter, Secrest & Emery LLP for the defendant.