Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.


December 14, 2004.

ABDUS SHAHID, Plaintiff,

The opinion of the court was delivered by: HAROLD BAER, JR., District Judge


Plaintiff, Abdus Shahid ("Plaintiff" or "Shahid), brought the instant case against his former employer, the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation ("Defendant" or "HHC"). Plaintiff alleges that HHC terminated his employment because of his color, race, gender and national original under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000 et seq. ("Title VII") and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin Code § 8-101 et seq. ("CHRL"). HHC moves for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons set forth below, the motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.


  A. Factual Background

  Shahid was born in Bangladesh, and became a United States citizen in 1996. (Dep. of Shahid, 9/9/2004, at 14:1 — 16) (herein, "Ex. A).

  On March 1, 1999, Shahid was appointed to the position of Health Care Investigator at Jacobi Medical Center ("Jacobi") in the Patient Accounts Department. (Ltr. Appointment, 2/26/1999) (herein "Ex. B"). A Health Care Investigator reviews patients' accounts to determine the amount the insurance company should be billed, adjusts patients' accounts upon receipt of payment by the insurance company and, in the event the insurance company fails to pay, requests payment. (Ex. A at 51:1 — 53:15) (Functional Job Desc. For Hosp. Care Investigator, No. 00182) (herein "Ex. C"). The appointment was subject to the satisfactory completion of a twelve-month "probationary period." (Ex. B). On May 20, 1999, Sherri Moore-Walker ("Walker"), a Senior Hospital Care Investigator and Plaintiff's supervisor, prepared, and, on June 8, 1999, Tanya Blanchette ("Blanchette"), Assistant Patient Accounts Manager, reviewed, Shahid's performance evaluation covering March 1, 1999 to June 1, 1999. (Criteria-Based Performance Evaluation of Shahid, dated 5/20/1999) (herein, "Ex. E"). Shahid's overall performance was rated as "satisfactory," but the evaluation indicated a number of categories where Shahid "needed improvement," including "prioritize work appropriately," "responsible for appropriate case documentation and timely follow-up," and "complete assigned tasks on time." (Ex. E). Overall, the evaluation noted Shahid's need to improve, i.e.,:
. . . a more timely follow up on accts {sic} that require additional attention. He needs to complete writeups {sic} in the ONM {sic} and bring accts {sic} to a satisfactory closure. SR {sic} HCI will continue to motivate Mr. Shahid in order to bring forth his best talents and qualities by developing a health {sic} balance during [the] day. Billing and [f]ollow-ups by phone {sic}, mail and electronics to insure {sic} maximization of revenue and thus[,] in turn[,] allow him to realize high standards of performance.
(Ex. E).*fn1
  Three months later, at Shahid's six-month evaluation, Walker, again, prepared and Blanchette, again, reviewed Shahid's performance evaluation. However, this time, Shahid received an overall review of "unsatisfactory." (Criteria-Based Performance Evaluation of Shahid, 9/13/1999) (herein, "Ex. F"). While Shahid maintained his capabilities in using the electronic billing system, his overall progress was insufficient. (Ex. F). Shahid's performance was described in these words:
There has been no progress in follow-up {sic} on his accounts necessary to obtain payments and resolution. Mr. Shahid does not follow up with phone calls and/or electronic status checks to various insurance companies without continuous prodding and reminders (both verbal and written [OAM]) to advise the Senior {sic} or Supv. {sic} of his research. He has failed to make appropriate documentation in his cases and he does not follow instructions thoroughly.
(Ex F.). In addition, the evaluation noted that Shahid failed to conduct detailed interviews, his documentation was inaccurate, and he failed to demonstrate sufficient knowledge of his job. (Ex. F). Shahid "refused to sign or acknowledge the evaluation." (Ex. F).

  On September 22, 1999, the Department of Human Resources/Labor Relations terminated Shahid's employment "as a hospital care investigator at Jacobi Medical Center . . . effective close of business October 5, 1999 due to [Shahid's] failure to satisfactorily complete [his] probationary period." (Ltr. from Morris to Shahid, 9/22/1999) (herein, "Ex. G").

  B. Procedural History

  On January 19, 2000, Shahid filed a joint Complaint with the New York City Commission on Human Rights ("CCHR") and the Equal Opportunity Commission ("EEOC). (Shahid v. Jacobi Hosp., Compl. No. 16FA00130) (Jan. 19, 2000) (herein, "Ex H"). The complaint alleged discrimination based on national origin (Bangladesh) and gender (male). The CCHR conducted a thorough investigation, which "consisted of interviewing the complainant and reviewing documentation supplied by both respondent, Jacobi Hospital, and the complainant." (Determination and Or. of the CCHR, In re Abdus Shahid v. Jacobi Hospital, Compl. No. M-E-NS-100-1008216-E, Apr. 8, 2003) (herein, "Ex. I"). Among other findings, CCHR concluded that "there were seventeen Asian males employed by respondent Jacobi Medical Center who were hired on or before September 1999" and "five of the seventeen Asian males provided clerical and bookkeeping services, or performed other duties not involved with direct patient care." (Ex. I). CCHR found that "there is no probable cause to believe that the respondent engaged in the unlawful discriminatory practices alleged in the complaint." (Ex. I).

  Shahid appealed CCHR's determination. On August 18, 2003, after review of the materials, New York City Human Rights Commissioner, Patricia Gatling ("Gatling"), affirmed the Determination and Order. (Determ. & Or. Aft. Rev., In re Abdus Shahid v. Jacobi Hosp., Compl. No. M-E-NS-100-1008216-E, Aug. 18, 2003) (herein, "Ex. J"). Subsequently, on September 24, 2004, the EEOC adopted the findings of the Commission. (Dismiss. and Not. of Suit Rt., Charge No. 16F-A0-0130, Sept. 24, 2003) (herein, "Ex. K").

  Accordingly, following the denial of his appeal, on October 24, 2004, Plaintiff filed the instant action alleging that he was impermissibly terminated on the basis of race, color, national origin, and sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and CHRL § 8-107.1 (Compl. ¶¶ 5, 8), and sought $10,000,000 in damages.


  A. Summary Judgment Standard ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.