Jules v. Chesner

Background

Pro se plaintiff Evita Jules sued Cosmetic and Reconstruction Dentistry, Dr. Michael Chesner, and Dr. Robert B. Vogel, D.D.S., PLLC. She alleged employment discrimination based on race and national origin under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the New York State Human Rights Law, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and the New York City Human Rights Law. She also alleged that the defendants and their attorney engaged in fraud and conspiracy to cause the New York State Division of Human Rights to dismiss her complaint.

Defendants moved to dismiss. Magistrate Judge Netburn issued a Report and Recommendation, and the district court initially adopted it and dismissed the case. The court later reopened the case because Jules had not received the full recommendation before filing her objections. Jules then submitted renewed objections.

Review of the Recommendation

The court explained that specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation receive a fresh review, while general or conclusory objections are reviewed only for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record. The court found that Jules’s renewed objections were broad, conclusory, unsupported by legal authority, and largely repeated her earlier arguments. It therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in full and granted defendants’ motion to dismiss. The case was dismissed. The court stated that Jules may pursue her state-law claims in state court.

The court also ruled that Jules’s failure to make adequate and specific objections prevented appellate review of the decision. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. The clerk was directed to close the case.