plaintiffs who take advantage of laws affording vital protection to society by filing
frivolous — sometimes even mendacious — claims thereunder for personal
financial gain, is just as much of a threat. At a discrimination trial, it is the job of the jury
to decide whether a plaintiff's claim is meritorious or frivolous. When a party, usually the
defendant, moves for summary judgment, it is asking the court to make that
determination instead. Courts are not infallible. In undertaking such a task, a court should
be mindful to prevent errors which could result in the dismissal of a worthy claim, even
if it means risking an unworthy claim proceeding to trial. In other words, it must err on
the side of the plaintiff. Toward this aim, many rules and standards have evolved for the
court to follow.
Applicable Standards
I. Summary Judgment
It is well established that on a motion for summary judgment the court is to decide
only matters of law (see S.J. Capelin Associates, Inc. v Globe Manufacturing
Corp., 34 NY2d 338 [1974]), accepting "as true the evidence presented by the
opposing party" (Hotopp Associates, Ltd. v Victoria's Secret Stores, Inc., 256
AD2d 285 [1st Dept 1998]), drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the
non-moving party (see Garcia v J.C. Duggan, Inc., 180 AD2d 579, 580 [1st Dept
1992]), and basing its decision "on the version of the facts most favorable to" that party
(McLaughlin v Thaima Realty Corp., 161 AD2d 383, 384 [1st Dept 1990]). It is
the jury which shall decide questions of fact, and where "competing inferences may
reasonably be drawn" they shall be drawn by the jury (Myers v Fir Cab Corp., 64
NY2d 806, 808 [1985]).
Where there is conflicting testimony, a summary judgment motion must be denied