Court Declines Supplemental Jurisdiction Over Verizon Discrimination Claim

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A New York federal district court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over an employee's remaining New York State Human Rights Law employment discrimination claim against Verizon New York, Inc., dismissing the action without prejudice after previously granting summary judgment on all federal claims. The court reasoned that comity weighs heavily in favor of dismissal since NYSHRL claims are evaluated under different standards than federal employment discrimination claims and the employee would not be prejudiced by dismissal.

Why it matters

This case highlights the complex legal landscape around employment discrimination claims, where federal and state laws can have different standards and requirements. The court's decision to decline supplemental jurisdiction underscores the importance of carefully navigating the exhaustion of remedies process when bringing both federal and state-level discrimination claims.

The details

The federal district court had previously granted summary judgment in favor of Verizon on the employee's federal employment discrimination claims. With the federal claims dismissed, the court then considered whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-level discrimination claim under the New York State Human Rights Law. Ultimately, the court determined that comity - the respect for state sovereignty - weighed heavily in favor of declining to hear the state law claim, given the different legal standards applied. The employee was not prejudiced by the dismissal, as they remained free to pursue the state claim in state court.

• The federal court granted summary judgment on the employee's federal claims on February 9, 2026.

What’s next

The employee may choose to pursue the state-level discrimination claim in New York state court, now that the federal court has declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.