Case Citator › Yvette Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc., David Otani, William Betts, Diane Lewis, Sara Lee Corporation, and Herve Heriveaux

Yvette Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc., David Otani, William Betts, Diane Lewis, Sara Lee Corporation, and Herve Heriveaux

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Superseded by statute
Court
Second Circuit
Citation
202 F.3d 560
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
59 of 59
Citing cases (total)
59
Treatment dates
2013
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. The 2005 Local Civil Rights Restoration Act displaced Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc.'s rule that New York City Human Rights Law claims followed federal and state standards. The Second Circuit confirmed the change in Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux North America, Inc.; Cruz's federal employment-discrimination rules continue to be applied.
More on how this was screened

All 59 flagged citations have been read, and the confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

59 later cases cite Yvette Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc., David Otani, William Betts, Diane Lewis, Sara Lee Corporation, and Herve Heriveaux; 59 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Yvette Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc., David Otani, William Betts, Diane Lewis, Sara Lee Corporation, and Herve Heriveaux?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Superseded by statute

  • The Second Circuit held that the 2005 amendment requires New York City Human Rights Law claims to be analyzed independently, displacing Cruz's former approach of applying federal and state standards.

    Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux North America, Inc. · Second Circuit · filed

    For many years, we construed the NYCHRL to be coextensive with its federal and state counterparts. ... Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc., 202 F.3d 560, 565 n.1 (2d Cir. 2000). In 2005, however, the New York City Council amended the NYCHRL by passing the Local Civil Rights Restoration Act of 2005 (the "Restoration Act"), N.Y.C. Local L. No. 85. ... As amended, the NYCHRL ... requires an independent analysis.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Yvette Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc., David Otani, William Betts, Diane Lewis, Sara Lee Corporation, and Herve Heriveaux and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace