Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 31, 2020

Bernheim v. New York City Department of Education

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:19-cv-09723
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
EmploymentMotion to DismissADA / DisabilityPro Se
In one sentence

In Bernheim v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Caproni adopted the recommendation, dismissing some claims and allowing others to be amended.

Who this affects

Laura Bernheim’s claims were affected: the federal discrimination claims against Annelisse Falzone and James Quail were dismissed without leave to amend, while the state and city human-rights claims and the Family and Medical Leave Act claims identified in the order were dismissed with leave to amend. The order also set notice-of-claim and amendment deadlines.

What happened

In Bernheim v. New York City Department of Education, Laura Bernheim, representing herself, claimed that the Department of Education and two supervisors discriminated against her based on age and disability and retaliated against her medical-leave request. She relied on federal, state, and city employment laws.

The court dismissed Bernheim’s disability, age, and Rehabilitation Act claims against the two supervisors without leave to amend. It dismissed her state and city human-rights claims against all defendants and her Family and Medical Leave Act claims against the supervisors with leave to amend. The court also gave her deadlines to serve a notice of claim and file an amended complaint.

Judge Valerie Caproni adopted Magistrate Judge James Cott’s recommendation in full after finding no clear error. The court also denied fee-free appeal status and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Bernheim v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:19-cv-09723
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
July 31, 2020

Background

Laura Bernheim brought the case without a lawyer under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. She alleged that the New York City Department of Education, Annelisse Falzone, and James Quail discriminated against her because of her age and disability and retaliated against her for requesting medical leave.

The Department of Education moved to dismiss the state and city human-rights claims because Bernheim had not served a required notice of claim. Falzone and Quail moved to dismiss the federal discrimination claims because those statutes do not provide for individual liability. They also sought dismissal of the Family and Medical Leave Act, state human-rights, and city human-rights claims based on the complaint’s alleged failure to show their personal involvement or, for the Family and Medical Leave Act claim, that either supervisor qualified as an employer under that law.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge James Cott recommended dismissing the Americans with Disabilities Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and Rehabilitation Act claims against Falzone and Quail without leave to amend because amendment would be futile. He recommended dismissing the state and city human-rights claims with leave to replead the supervisors’ personal involvement, and dismissing the Family and Medical Leave Act claim against Falzone and Quail with leave to allege facts showing that either supervisor met the statute’s definition of an employer.

The recommendation also advised allowing Bernheim an opportunity to file a late notice of claim for her state and city human-rights claims concerning her medical condition and claims accruing after February 9, 2018. No party objected within 14 days.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni adopted the recommendation in full after reviewing the record and finding no clear error. The court dismissed the Americans with Disabilities Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and Rehabilitation Act claims against Falzone and Quail without leave to amend. It dismissed the New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law claims against all defendants, and the Family and Medical Leave Act claim against Falzone and Quail, with leave to amend.

Bernheim was ordered to file a notice of claim for the state and city human-rights claims by August 14, 2020, and any amended complaint by September 25, 2020. The amended complaint had to state whether she served a notice of claim on the Department of Education and whether the Department provided the requested relief within 30 days. If she did not serve the notice, her state and city human-rights claims against the Department would be deemed abandoned. If she did not file an amended complaint, her Family and Medical Leave Act, state human-rights, and city human-rights claims against Falzone and Quail would be deemed abandoned.

The order states that the Department of Education had not moved against or answered the portions of the original complaint asserting Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, and Family and Medical Leave Act claims against it. The court also certified under federal law that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status. The clerk was directed to mail the order to Bernheim and terminate docket entries 12 and 25.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.