Reydman v. Southwest Brooklyn Health Home LLC

Reydman v Southwest Brooklyn Health Home LLC 2025 NY Slip Op 32273(U) June 26, 2025 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 500551/2024 Judge: Anne J. Swern Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/27/2025 04:36 PM INDEX NO. 500551/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 131 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/27/2025

Atan IAS Trial Tenn, Part 75 of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Kings County, at the Courthouse located at 360 Adams Street, Brooklyn, New York on· the 26th day of June 2025. PRESENT: HON. ANNE J. SWERN, J.S.C.

ANNAREYDMAN, DECISION ORDER on ~ehalf ofherselfarzd others .similqtly ~ituated; .Index No.: 500551/2024 Plaintiff, -again.st- Calendar No.: 40

SOlITHWESTBROOKLYN HEALTH H()ME Moifon Seq.; 003. LLC, and MAIMONIDES MEDICAL CENTER,.

Defendants.

.Recitationofthefollowingpapers as required by CPI,R 2219(a);· Papers Numbered Not'ice ofMotiort, Plaintiff's Affirmation, Mernoraridlµll ofL~w and ijxhibits (NYSCEF 64-81) ........... .......,....................... 1, 2

Memorandum ofLaw (NYSCEF 51-54, 1 86) ..................... ·~··..,......,........... ............. .3

Reply Memorandum of Law (NYSCEF 87) ............................................. ,..... ,.... ~ .. .4

Upon the foregoin~ papers and after oral argument; the deczsion and order of the Court

is as foUows :

.Plaintiff'has commenced this a,ction again.st defenclants aUeging.violations of 1) New

York Labor L_aw (NYLL) § 191 for failure tQ pay wages tir:n~ly; .2) ·Fair Labor Standards Act .

(FLSA) for failure to pay overtime; 3) 12 NYCRR § 142.22 for failure to pay overtime;

4) NYLL ·~ 195 [3] forfailure to furnish wage st~tements; 5) FLSAfor retaliation; and 6) NYLL

§ 215 [iJ [AJ forr¹;taHation.

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/27/2025 04:36 PM INDEX NO. 500551/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 131 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/27/2025

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/27/2025 04:36 PM INDEX NO. 500551/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 131 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/27/2025

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/27/2025 04:36 PM INDEX NO. 500551/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 131 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/27/2025

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/27/2025 04:36 PM INDEX NO. 500551/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 131 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/27/2025

Footnotes

[1] In the. Memorari(jum ofLa:w, plaintiff incorporates' by reference the affiqavit:and e;(htbits that were submitte.d in opposition to defendant's prior motion for summary ji.ldgmenuhsJ was denied with. le.ave to retlew (MS 002). 50055Jli014 Pagel ofS 1 of 5 [* 1] DefendaAt So.uthwest BroQklyn Health Home (Southwest) has now moved for sUmmary judgment dismissing.the comph!.int as·. plainiiff is not and iieverwas au employee of.Southwest. In s.upport of the motion,.So.uthwest has submi~ inter alia, the.affi.da'vit of its Executive Director Magdalena Gordon (GQ.-don). Plaintjff ~ submitted her.affidavit, together-wjtll~ copy of the incide~t-repo'rt·oh Southwest.'Brooklyrt Health Hertle LLC doing busb1ess a$ .BrQok}yn Health Home's .(So:uthwest) letterhead -that:was allegedly"the .basis for terminating plaintiff's employment with Maimonides. Plaintiff state.s jn her affidavit that M&i,n9nides Medical Center (Maimonides) and.Southwest jointly ~id business,as Brooklyn Health.Ho~~- Therefore, she was a '·~oint employee" of both defendants (NYSCEF SZ:14) ·andjoi~tly termin~t~<,l h¢r employment ID violation of federal and st.ate law. In Gordon1s affidavit, she states that .Southwest Brookly_.i Health Ho~e LLC is doing business as Brooklyn.Health Home (NYSCEF 9:11 ). Factual Backgr.o.und Plaintiff.~ ~h.ired as an ettJ.ployee:of Maimonides as a Care Mana@er (NYS.CEF 52:,r3; 68, 70, 72). Southwest coordipates medical ~d behavioral healthcare -semces for Medicai.4 patients. The Southwest-pro~ was established and built on the·"foundation of a successful program developed .at Malmonidesl] along with many c.Qnm,:Upity-bas¢d otgan'izafions with funding provided by·New York .State." (NY~CE.F 65:,r2) . .Southwest does not have any employ~~.including plajiltift only Executiye Director Gordon who supervises the Board .o f Governors. Gordon.does not receive-a saiary·ot compe.nsati_on from-Southwest but is responsible. for the .day-'to,-day·_adrn,ini~trative operations for Southwc:.~t. (id. :,r,I6--7). Gordon is employed as an Assistant Vice Presid~nrof Complex Care.and P9pulation Heiµth overseelng the Maimonides' Care Management Department (id :,i13). S005SJJ20U Page2o/S,

[2] of 5 [* 2] Southwest .and Maimonides.used separate case m_a,qagement systems-..~at plaintiff had access to during.her em:ployniertt. Plaintiff did not enter the ,care pl<!nS in $.outhw~sr system b-t1t accessed_it to see 1) when_~ents were admitted or .discharged from-Maimonides, 2) the patient ca~prPvideis' open appqintments to schedule the patients' care a:nd-a:ssessments, 3) care coordination docun:ien~s, and 4) paHertt. .consents and other (;iocuments related to her work (NYSCEF s·2:,M[6-9). Her supervisqrs were Jesse.lrizarr.y, nordon and Amy Ortiz who wete paid by Maimonides. These individuals super.vised her oo behalf of both-defendants and_ communicated with her on Brooklyn Health Home letterhead. (id 1111-20). .During .h~r eti,.ployment, pla.i,ti.tiff'believed that Southwest d/b/a Brooklyn Health Home was.- the employer for her and the supervis«>rs.(see generally NYSCEF 52). Law-and.Analysis a) Summary- Judgment Summary judgment may be;, s,ant~q only when rio tri~ble issue of fact exists·.(Alvarez v Prospect Hospital, 68 NY2d'320 (1986]). "A party JDQving for sm:nmaiY judgment mast.]Iiake a primafacie showing of entitlement to judgment·~ a matter of law, prQ<iucing sufficient.evi(leilce to denioristrate:the··absence of any·material issue of fact. »ow.ever, a failure to ~e111onstrate a prinulfacie ¢t1titlement to.SUllllIUU'Y judgment motion, .requires a d_e_nj_al 9f the motion tegar<:}less of the adequacy of the opposing papers." (Ayotte ·v G~rvasio, 8! NY2d 1062, 1063 (19931, citing Al'varet v Fro$pect ,Hospital, 6S: NY2.d 324). "Once thj$:sh9wing has been m~t', the burden· shifts to the .honmov1ng party to produce.~videntiacy: pr9of in admissible form. s\lfficierttto establish the existence of matenal issues of-fa:ct that require a tria,l for ~ I ution" (Giufftidffl' Citibank, 100 NY2d 71,; ·s,1 [2003] and Alva,-ez.v.. Prosp~ct Hospital, 6_8 _.NY2d 324). 'SIJIIS51/1fl24 1"41:~Jo/S_

[3] of 5 [* 3] The Coµrt'~ only role uponawotioh for summary judgment isto identify the existence of triable issues, and not to determine the merits of any such issues ( Vega v Restani Construction Corp., 18 NY3d 499, 505 (2012]) or the credibility of the movanfs version of events (see Xiang Fu He v Troon Management, Inc., 34 NY3d 167, 175 [2019) [intemaJ citations omitted]). The Court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, affording them the benefitofall re~sonable inferences thatcan be drawn from the evidence (see Negri vShop & Sfop,1nc;, 65 N'(2d 625,.626 [1985]). Themotion.sho.uld be deriied whe.r ethe f'1.cts are in dispute, where:~i:ff.erent inferences may be drawnfrolll th~ evidence, or where the credibility pf thewitnessesisinquestion($ee Cameronv Cityo,fLong Beqch, .297AD2d 773,774 [2d Dept. 2002]). b) Analysis Southwest's motion for swnrnary judgment is denied with leave to renew after the completion of discovery. While Southwest established a prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, plaintiff submitted evidence in admissible form sufficierit to establish the existence ofmateriaLissues offact ((]iujfrida v Citibank, 100 NY2d 81 andAlvar.ezv.. Prospect Hospi(al, 68 NY2d 324). The affidiwits, together with Brooklyn Hea1th Home's ii:tc.ident report concc::riiing plaintiff's alleged misco11duct, and Gordon's dual r6le with defendants, create an i~sue of fact whether Southwest wa~ pla.i:ntiff'sjoint employer and, therefore, :may be jointly liable in damages (Ling Nan Zheng v Liberty Apparel Co., 355 F.3d 61 [2d Cit. 2003 J, citing Rutherford Food Corp. v McComb, 331 US 722 [I 947]). Southwest failed to address the incident report in a reply affidavit by Gordon. Also, Southwest was in possession of plaintiff's affidavit when re-filing this motion. It had two opportunities to address the issue of Maimonides employees writing-up other Maimonides co- 500551/1024. Pag~~ of5

[4] of 5 [* 4] workers on Brooklyn Health Home letterhead. This report raises the inference that Brooklyn H~alth.Home had contrpl over Maimonides employees or was involved in their hiring or firing (Cameron v Ci.tyofLong Beach. '297 AD2d 774; LingNan ZhengvLtberty.11,ppqre/Co., $Upra), Any conflict between phuntiff's complaint, amended complaint; affidavit and administrative complaints with the National Labor Relations Board, Plaintiff's Union, U.S. Equal Employment ()pportunity Com.mission and New York State Di vision of Human Rights concerning whether she credibly believed she was jointly employed by defendants is a question of credibility (see Hin¢.v, /a/a Transportation, Inc;, 97AD3'd 794, 795 [+d Dept. 2012]). Without discovery, the motion must be denied. The Court has considered the Soµthwest's remaining argumen1s and fin(is same to be without merit. Maimonides did not oppose this IUOtiQn. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that defendant SOUTHWEST BROOKLYN HEALTH HOME LLC's motion Jot an order of summary judgment pursuaritto CPLR § 3212 dismissing the complaint against it is-denfod . with leave to renew after . the . completion ofdiscovery. This constitutes the decision .arid order of the Court. F9r Clerks u~e,only: Hon. . .n, J.S~C. MG _ _ Date : 2025 MD - - Motionseq.# __ ___ _ 500551/1024 PageSof5

[5] of 5 [* 5]