Gulino v. The Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New…

Background

This class action had been referred to Special Master John S. Siffert in 2014. Jennifer Calliste moved in March 2025 for permission to file a claim form after the deadline and participate in the class. She attributed the delay to lack of notice and personal circumstances.

The initial deadline for class members to file claims was December 31, 2014, and the deadline was later extended to May 31, 2023. The court had approved notice by mail, radio, and print publications. The print notices appeared in eight publications, including New York Daily News, New York Post, Metro, AM New York, The Chief Leader, New York Teacher, Amsterdam News, and Caribbean Life. The notices were also broadcast on local New York radio stations for four weeks.

The defendant opposed Calliste’s motion, arguing that she had not shown “excusable neglect”—a legally acceptable reason for missing a deadline. The Special Master recommended denying the motion. Calliste objected, and the parties submitted additional briefing.

Court’s Analysis

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), a court may extend a deadline for good cause when the movant shows excusable neglect. Courts consider the danger of prejudice, the length and effect of the delay, the reason for the delay and whether it was within the movant’s control, and whether the movant acted in good faith. The court reviewed the Special Master’s factual findings and legal conclusions independently, a process called de novo review.

The court focused on the reason for Calliste’s delay. Calliste said that the 2014 mailed notice did not reach her because she had moved, but she did not explain why she failed to arrange for her mail to be forwarded. She also cited her father’s death in 2003, her sister’s death in 2020, related financial and health effects, and emergency surgery in 2017. The court noted that Calliste worked as a substitute teacher during 2012 through 2017 and returned to work five months after the surgery, continuing to work through the May 31, 2023 deadline.

The court concluded that these circumstances did not justify the delay. It distinguished cases involving mental impairment or medical documentation showing that a condition affected a person’s ability to understand or comply with a legal deadline. The court stated that Calliste had not alleged a specific condition that prevented her from understanding the case or provided medical documentation supporting that type of impairment.

Disposition

The court adopted the Special Master’s Report and Recommendation in full and denied Calliste’s motion for permission to file a late claim form and participate in the class. Judge Kimba M. Wood also held that there was no just reason for delaying judgment and certified the judgment as final and appealable under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).