Shahid-Ikhlas v. The New York And Presbyterian Hospital, Inc.
- Gregory Woods
- 1:22-cv-10643
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Shahid-Ikhlas v. The New York And Presbyterian Hospital, Judge Woods granted dismissal of the Title VII claim and closed the case.
Hakimah Shahid-Ikhlas’s federal Title VII claim was dismissed; her state-law claims were left outside the court’s supplemental jurisdiction, and the case was closed. The hospital received judgment.
What happened
In Shahid-Ikhlas v. The New York And Presbyterian Hospital, Hakimah Shahid-Ikhlas sought an exemption from New York’s vaccine requirement for healthcare workers and brought a claim under Title VII, along with claims under New York State and New York City human-rights laws.
A magistrate judge recommended granting the hospital’s motion to dismiss, finding that accommodating the requested exemption would have caused undue hardship. No one objected within the required time, and the court found no clear error in that recommendation.
Judge Gregory H. Woods adopted the recommendation, granted the motion to dismiss the Title VII claim, declined to hear the remaining state-law claims, entered judgment for the hospital, and closed the case. The court also did not grant permission to amend the complaint because Shahid-Ikhlas had not requested it.
The detailed version
- Shahid-Ikhlas v. The New York And Presbyterian Hospital, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-10643
- Gregory Woods
- May 24, 2023
Background
Hakimah Shahid-Ikhlas sued The New York And Presbyterian Hospital, Inc. The opinion states that she sought an exemption from the New York State Department of Health’s vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. Her complaint asserted a claim under Title VII and claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Aaron recommended granting the hospital’s motion to dismiss. The recommendation concluded that the complaint failed to state a Title VII claim because accommodating Shahid-Ikhlas’s request would have caused the hospital undue hardship as a matter of law. Because the Title VII claim was the only claim giving the federal court original jurisdiction, the recommendation also advised the court to decline supplemental jurisdiction—meaning authority to hear related state-law claims—over the remaining claims.
Court’s Review and Ruling
No party submitted an objection within the fourteen-day objection period. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record, and found none. It accepted and adopted the recommendation in its entirety.
Judge Gregory H. Woods granted the hospital’s motion to dismiss as to the Title VII claim and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims. The court did not grant leave to amend because Shahid-Ikhlas had not requested permission to amend. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment for the hospital and close the case. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.