Delo v. Fordham University

Background

Benjamin J. Delo brought this action against Fordham University after Fordham denied his son admission. Fordham moved to dismiss. A magistrate judge recommended granting the motion, and the district court adopted that recommendation on August 27, 2025. The court concluded that Delo lacked standing, meaning he was not legally entitled to pursue the claims, and that he had failed to state a claim even if he had standing.

Delo filed another motion asking the court to reconsider its dismissal, along with a letter. The opinion addresses that motion. It notes that a prior motion for reconsideration had already been denied.

Standard for Reconsideration

Under Southern District of New York Local Rule 6.3, a reconsideration motion must identify matters or controlling decisions that the court overlooked. The court explained that this remedy is narrowly applied and generally requires information that could reasonably be expected to change the court’s conclusion.

Arguments and Analysis

Delo focused on the prior recommendation’s analysis of whether Fordham was a state actor and on Fordham’s tax-exempt status. The court found those arguments neither dispositive nor convincing because they attempted to revisit issues the court had already decided. The court also noted that Delo acknowledged Fordham’s website changes might have made the case moot, but said that information did not alter the court’s holding.

Disposition

Judge Jessica G.L. Clarke held that Delo did not meet the strict standard for reconsideration. The court therefore DENIED the Motion for Reconsideration and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion from the docket. The opinion does not change the court’s earlier dismissal based on lack of standing and failure to state a claim.