Weintraub v Grey Direct, Inc.

Weintraub v Grey Direct, Inc. 2007 NY Slip Op 03580 [39 AD3d 400] April 24, 2007 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Robin Weintraub, Appellant,
v
Grey Direct, Inc., Respondent.

—[*1] Pedowitz & Meister, LLP, New York (Arnold H. Pedowitz of counsel), for appellant.

Davis & Gilbert LLP, New York (Jessica Golden Cortes of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Faviola A. Soto, J.), entered March 6, 2006, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Summary judgment was properly granted based upon the clear and unambiguous agreement pursuant to which plaintiff was employed by defendant (see W.W.W. Assoc. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157, 162 [1990]). Contrary to plaintiff's claims, the agreement did not preclude her reassignment and her reassignment did not constitute a constructive discharge.

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them without merit. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.