Pierre v. Fashion Retail NYC LLC
- Katherine Failla
- 1:24-cv-06895
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Pierre v. Fashion Retail NYC LLC, Judge Katherine Failla granted in part a motion to consolidate three disability-access cases for discovery.
The plaintiffs, defendants, and counsel in the Pierre, Range, and Girotto actions are affected. Their cases will proceed on a consolidated basis for discovery, and the parties must coordinate a proposed discovery schedule and case-management plan.
What happened
Pierre v. Fashion Retail NYC LLC and two related cases involve similar claims that people with disabilities were denied equal access to the same retail location. The claims arise under the Americans with Disabilities Act and New York state and city human-rights laws.
The defendants asked the court to consolidate the three cases. The court found extensive overlap in the factual and legal allegations and granted the motion in part by consolidating the cases for discovery. The parties must discuss a combined discovery schedule and submit a joint proposed case-management plan by March 7, 2025.
Judge Katherine Failla issued the order. The order addressed case management and discovery; it did not decide whether any party violated disability-discrimination laws.
The detailed version
- Pierre v. Fashion Retail NYC LLC · No. 1:24-cv-06895
- Katherine Failla
- Feb. 7, 2025
Background
The court considered three related cases: the Pierre Action, the Range Action, and the Girotto Action. The plaintiffs are Jocelyn Pierre, King Range, Jr., and Luigi Girotto. The defendants named across the cases are Fashion Retail NYC LLC, RHC Operating LLC, and Fashion Retail Inc. The cases assert substantially similar claims that individuals with disabilities were denied “full and equal access to, and full and equal enjoyment of,” the same retail location in midtown Manhattan. The claims arise under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and/or the New York City Human Rights Law.
Answers and cross-claims had been filed in each case. An initial pretrial conference had been held in the Pierre Action, but not in the Range or Girotto Actions. Defendants RHC Operating LLC and Fashion Retail NYC LLC moved to consolidate the three cases. Counsel for the plaintiffs in the Pierre and Girotto Actions opposed consolidation, while counsel for the plaintiff in the Range Action did not oppose it.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) allows a court to join matters for hearing or trial, consolidate actions, or issue other orders when cases involve common questions of law or fact. The court explained that consolidation may promote efficiency and reduce costs and delay, but it must not sacrifice fairness or justice.
Ruling
After reviewing the complaints, the court found extensive factual and legal overlap. It granted in part the defendants’ motion and ordered that the three cases be consolidated for discovery. The parties were ordered to meet and confer about a consolidated discovery schedule and submit a joint proposed case-management plan reflecting that schedule by March 7, 2025.
The clerk was directed to file the order in all three cases and terminate the specified consolidation motions. The order did not resolve the underlying disability-access claims or determine liability. Judge Katherine Polk Failla also reminded counsel to review the court’s individual rules and stated that the parties could request initial pretrial conferences or referrals to Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses or the court’s mediation program.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.