Civil Rights - Discrimination in Employment - Retaliation

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2023, which, to the extent appealed from, denied counterclaim defendant Manhattan Place Condominium's (MPC) motion for summary judgment dismissing Tyler Erdman's first counterclaim for retaliation under the New York City Human Rights Law (City HRL), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted.

Erdman failed to raise issues of fact as to whether he had "a relationship characterized in some manner as one of employment, past or present," with MPC, as is required for retaliation liability under the City HRL (Schmitt v Artforum Intl. Mag., Inc., 178 AD3d 578, 584 [1st Dept 2019]). Erdman argues for the first time on appeal that he can maintain this action against MPC because he formerly worked for MPC as an independent contractor. We decline to reach that issue since Erdman did not raise it before the motion court and "it is not a purely legal argument apparent on the face of the record" (Louis v City of New York, 223 AD3d 526, 527 [1st Dept 2024]).

Erdman's cross-appeal is dismissed as abandoned for failure to raise grounds for affirmative relief from the order in his brief (see Mangold v Board of Mgrs. of Meadow Ct. Condominium, 236 AD3d 406, 407-408 [1st Dept 2025]). Concur—Webber, J.P., Friedman, Gesmer, Rosado, Mendez, JJ.

Motion to withdraw cross-appeal, granted.