Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 13, 2025

Buxbaum v. Zillow Group, Inc.

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-00225
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Buxbaum v. Zillow Group, Inc., Judge Swain dismissed Michael Buxbaum’s duplicate lawsuit without prejudice while his similar earlier case remained pending.

Who this affects

Michael Buxbaum’s new lawsuit against Zillow Group, Inc.; the order left his earlier related case under docket number 24-CV-10054 (LTS) pending.

What happened

In Buxbaum v. Zillow Group, Inc., Michael Buxbaum, representing himself, sued Zillow Group, Inc. He said the company refused to list four properties for sale by owner.

The court found that Buxbaum had already filed a substantially similar case involving the same properties. Because that earlier case was still pending, the court dismissed this complaint without prejudice as duplicative.

Judge Swain also said Buxbaum could seek to add or substitute a defendant in the earlier case, if allowed by the federal rules. The court denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Buxbaum v. Zillow Group, Inc. · No. 1:25-cv-00225
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 13, 2025

Background

Michael Buxbaum, who was representing himself, sued Zillow Group, Inc. He alleged that the defendant refused to list four properties for sale by owner.

Buxbaum had previously filed a substantially similar lawsuit in the same court, docketed as 24-CV-10054 (LTS). In that earlier case, he also alleged that he could not list the same four properties for sale by owner with Zillow. The court noted that the earlier case could not proceed until Buxbaum either paid the filing fees or submitted an application to proceed without paying them.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice as duplicative of the pending earlier case. The order states that no useful purpose would be served by litigating the duplicate lawsuit. The court further stated that, if Buxbaum needed to add or substitute a defendant, he could do so in the earlier case by filing an amended complaint, to the extent permitted by Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The opinion does not decide whether Buxbaum’s underlying allegations against Zillow are legally or factually valid.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.