Skip to main content
Skip to main content

Doctor Fred L. Pasternack v. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings

NYJune 30, 2016No. 112Cited 480 times
Plaintiff Win

Case Details

Judge(s)
Abdus-Salaam, Difiore, Pigott, Garcia, Stein, Fahey, Rivera
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal
Circuit
2nd Circuit

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful Termination

Outcome

New York's highest court held that drug-testing laboratories and program administrators owe a duty of care to employees under negligence law when violating FAA/DOT regulations, and that fraud claims can be based on reliance by third parties whose reliance causes injury to the plaintiff. The court reversed the lower court's dismissal and remanded for further proceedings.

What This Ruling Means

**Doctor Sues Lab Company Over Employment Dispute** Dr. Fred Pasternack filed a lawsuit against Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (LabCorp), a major medical testing company, over an employment-related dispute. While the specific details of what triggered the conflict aren't clear from the available information, the case involved employment law issues between the doctor and his former employer. **Court's Decision** A New York court dismissed Dr. Pasternack's case in June 2016. This means the court threw out his lawsuit without awarding him any money or other remedies. The dismissal suggests either that his claims lacked legal merit, weren't properly supported by evidence, or failed to meet required legal standards. **What This Means for Workers** This case highlights an important reality for employees: simply having a workplace dispute doesn't guarantee a successful lawsuit. Courts require workers to meet specific legal requirements and provide sufficient evidence to support their claims. When considering legal action against an employer, workers should understand that employment cases can be complex and challenging to win. It's crucial to document workplace issues thoroughly and consult with employment attorneys who can properly evaluate whether a case has strong legal grounds before proceeding.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.