Bernstein v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

Background

Mary Helen Bernstein and Elizabeth Grace Tigano filed a discrimination action against the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and several individual defendants employed by those agencies. The opinion states that the plaintiffs were proceeding without an attorney and had received permission to proceed without paying the filing fee.

The plaintiffs had previously received multiple extensions to amend their complaint. After reviewing their first amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the court concluded that it failed to state a claim. The plaintiffs later filed a second amended complaint, and the court gave them 60 days to file another amended complaint.

Motion and ruling

The plaintiffs moved to stay, or pause, the proceedings for nearly a year, until March 2022. They cited their disabilities, Elizabeth Grace Tigano’s hospitalization, the time needed to address issues identified by the court, and Mary Helen Bernstein’s family emergencies. The opinion notes that although the plaintiffs said their motion was accompanied by a declaration, no declaration had been filed.

The court denied the plaintiffs’ request for the nearly one-year stay. It explained that it had attempted to accommodate their situations through multiple extensions and referrals to the Legal Help Desk, but could not pause the case for a year. The court also cited its responsibility to manage its docket, resolve litigation promptly, and prevent prejudice to defendants.

The court granted the plaintiffs an extension until July 26, 2021, to file their third amended complaint. It stated that no further extensions would be granted. The order addressed the stay request and filing deadline; it did not decide the merits of the discrimination claims.