Batista v. Consolidated Edison of New York, Inc.

Background

Anthony Batista brought claims against Consolidated Edison of New York, Inc. for employment discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. After the defendant moved to dismiss the original complaint, Judge Jennifer H. Rearden allowed Batista to file an amended complaint and warned that he would not receive another opportunity to amend to address issues raised by that motion. Batista then filed an amended complaint, and the defendant moved to dismiss it.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofky recommended dismissing Batista’s federal claims because he did not adequately allege that he had a disability or engaged in activity protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act. She also recommended that the court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction—meaning jurisdiction over related state-law claims—over the New York State and New York City claims. Finally, she recommended allowing Batista to amend the operative complaint again.

The defendant objected only to the recommendation allowing another amendment. It argued that Batista had not fixed the pleading problems after the earlier motion to dismiss and that Judge Rearden’s warning barred another amendment. The objection was filed one day late. The court stated that late objections ordinarily may be treated as waived, but reviewed this objection anyway because the delay resulted from a family emergency involving defense counsel’s child.

Court’s Analysis

After reviewing the objection from the beginning, Judge Broderick concluded that another amendment should be allowed. The court noted that the defendant’s earlier motion appeared to treat Batista’s two requests for accommodations as his only protected activities. That motion instead argued that Batista had not adequately alleged a causal connection between those requests and his termination. Because the earlier motion did not alert Batista to a possible deficiency concerning protected activity, the court concluded that Judge Rearden’s warning did not apply to that issue.

Disposition

Judge Broderick adopted Magistrate Judge Tarnofky’s report and recommendation. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment under the report’s terms and close the motion at docket entry 18. In accordance with the report, Batista must file a second amended complaint within 30 days of the order.