Buon v. Spindler
- Nelson Roman
- 7:19-cv-06760
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 9
In Buon v. Spindler, Judge Roman waived the conference requirement, allowed dismissal motions, and removed the case from mediation.
Lisa Buon and the defendants named in the court’s endorsement, including the Newburgh Teachers Association, the Newburgh Enlarged City School District, the school district’s Board of Education, and the individually identified defendants. The order also affected the case’s mediation status and set procedures for the anticipated dismissal motions.
What happened
In Buon v. Spindler, Lisa Buon, who was representing herself, sued the Newburgh Teachers Association and several school-district-related defendants. The defendants submitted letters saying they intended to seek dismissal on issues including service, jurisdiction, and whether the complaint stated valid discrimination or retaliation claims.
The court did not decide those proposed dismissal arguments. Instead, it allowed the defendants to file separate motions to dismiss and set dates for the parties’ written submissions. The court also considered the defendants’ request to leave mediation while those motions were pending.
Judge Nelson S. Roman waived the required pre-motion conference, granted the defendants leave to file their separate motions to dismiss, and granted their joint request to remove the case from mediation pending briefing and resolution of those motions. The clerk was directed to mail the endorsement to Buon, record proof of service, and terminate the three listed motions.
The detailed version
- Buon v. Spindler · No. 7:19-cv-06760
- Nelson Roman
- Dec. 10, 2019
Background
The court received three letters: a pre-motion letter from the Newburgh Teachers Association; a pre-motion letter from the other identified defendants, including the Newburgh Enlarged City School District Board of Education and the Newburgh Enlarged City School District; and a joint letter asking to remove the case from mediation. The letters stated that the defendants intended to seek dismissal of Buon’s complaint. The proposed grounds included improper service, lack of personal jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, and other defenses described in the letters. The letters also described proposed challenges to discrimination and retaliation claims under federal, New York State, and New York City laws. Those arguments were requests for future relief, not rulings by the court.
Ruling
The court waived the pre-motion conference requirement and granted the defendants leave to file their separate respective motions to dismiss. It set the following briefing schedule: defendants’ moving papers were to be served, but not filed, on January 17, 2020; Buon’s opposition papers were to be served, but not filed, on March 2, 2020; and reply papers were to be served on March 17, 2020. Defense counsel were directed to file all motion documents, including Buon’s opposition, on March 17, 2020. The parties were also directed to provide two copies of their respective motion documents to chambers when serving them on the opposing party.
The court granted the defendants’ joint request to remove the case from mediation pending briefing and resolution of the motions to dismiss. The clerk was directed to mail a copy of the endorsement to Buon, show proof of service on the docket, and terminate docket entries 14, 15, and 16. The opinion does not decide whether any claim should be dismissed, whether service was valid, or whether the defendants’ proposed arguments would succeed.
Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.