In Kim v. Goldberg, Weprin, Finkel, Goldstein, LLP, 120 AD3d 18, 987 N.Y.S.2d 338, 342 (1st Dept 2014), the Appellate Division held that the SDNY's grant of summary judgment on plaintiffs' claim that she was retaliated against for taking FMLA leave could not collaterally estopp plaintiff from prosecuting her NYCHRL claims in state court because "the only protected activity addressed by the court was plaintiff's taking her maternity leave" (Kim at 342). The Appellate Division then noted that "the court did not mention, let alone engage in any analysis of, the distinct instances of protected activity that form the basis of plaintiff's state and city claims" (id.).