Ferdous v. Hasan

Ferdous v. Hasan 2025 NY Slip Op 01789 · Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · March 26, 2025 · No. Index No. 706543/22

Summary

This New York Appellate Division decision reviews a lower court order denying defendants' motions to dismiss various claims, including breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and hostile work environment. The appellate court modified the order, granting dismissal of several causes of action against both defendants due to abandonment or failure to adequately plead essential elements. However, the court allowed the hostile work environment claim based on sex to proceed against one defendant while affirming the rest of the modified order.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
Angela G. Iannacci, J.P.; Cheryl E. Chambers; Lillian Wan; Carl J. Landicino, JJ.
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
March 26, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 706543/22
Procedural posture
Defendants appealed an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County denying their CPLR 3211(a)(7) motions to dismiss.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Barnali Hasan, Mahfujul Hasan v. Jannatul Ferdous
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

motions to dismisscivil proceduretortscontracts

Practice areas

civil proceduretortscontractsemployment lawreal estate

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the complaint sufficiently alleged each cause of action against each defendant under CPLR 3211(a)(7) so that the motions to dismiss should be granted.

Holdings

  1. The court granted the motions to dismiss against Barnali Hasan on all causes of action and against Mahfujul Hasan on all causes except the hostile work environment claim; the complaint failed to allege the requisite facts for malicious prosecution, fraud in the inducement, breach of lease, violation of Real Property Law §235‑d, intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment.

Key quotations

On a motion to dismiss a complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), the court must liberally construe the complaint, accept all facts as alleged in the pleading to be true, accord the plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory. (at 1)
A hostile work environment on the basis of sex exists 'when the workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment' (Parker Waichman, LLP v. Mauro, 215 AD3d 869, 874). (at 2)

Factual background

The plaintiffs, including Jannatul Ferdous, were employees of Efficient Medical & Dental Care, P.C., operated by defendants Barnali Hasan (physician) and Mahfujul Hasan (dentist), and were also residential tenants of the defendants. They sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and a hostile work environment based on sex.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court, Queens County denied the defendants' motions to dismiss. The Appellate Division modified the order, granting the motions in whole (for Barnali Hasan) and in part (for Mahfujul Hasan) and affirmed the modified order.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…