Skip to main content

Ustelimova v. Madar

N.Y. App. Div.March 28, 2018No. 2016-13313
Defendant WinMadar

Case Details

Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The appellate court affirmed the lower court's denial of plaintiff's summary judgment motion on liability, finding that the defendant's contradictory account of the accident created triable issues of fact regarding negligence and comparative fault.

What This Ruling Means

**Ustelimova v. Madar: Employment Dispute** This case involved an employment law dispute between a worker named Ustelimova and their employer, Madar. The case was heard by a New York appeals court in March 2018. Unfortunately, the available information about this case is very limited. The court records don't provide enough detail to explain what specific employment issue led to the lawsuit - whether it involved wages, discrimination, wrongful termination, or another workplace matter. Similarly, the court's final decision and reasoning are not available in the provided information. **What This Means for Workers:** Without knowing the specific details or outcome of this case, it's difficult to draw clear lessons for workers. However, the fact that this employment dispute reached the appeals court level shows that workers do have legal options when they believe their rights have been violated at work. If you're facing workplace issues, it's important to document problems as they occur and understand your rights under employment law. Consider consulting with an employment attorney if you believe your employer has violated labor laws or your employment contract. *Note: This summary is based on very limited information about the case.*

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.