We represented the owners of a residential apartment building in a lawsuit brought by the building’s superintendent. The owners had terminated the superintendent for performance-related issues. The superintendent sued, claiming that a number of years ago the owners’ father had promised him and his wife lifetime employment and lifetime tenancy at the building provided that the superintendent resigned from his labor union and never again joined a union. The Court dismissed these claims, agreeing with Tarter Krinsky & Drogin that a little known section of New York’s General Obligations Law declares as “void against public policy” any contract for employment that is based on an employee’s agreement to join or refrain from joining a union. Therefore, the Court held that even if the claimed promises had been made, they could not be enforced.
Laurent S. Drogin and Maxwell D. Rosenthal represented the client.
|Drogin, Laurent S. Partner and Chair of Labor and Employment Practice and Co-Chair of Restrictive Covenant Practice||Partner and Chair of Labor and Employment Practice and Co-Chair of Restrictive Covenant Practice||212.216.8016|