Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 13, 2020

Tsatsani v. Walmart, Inc.

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:19-cv-09063
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
EmploymentADA / DisabilityMotion to DismissCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Tsatsani v. Walmart, Judge Engelmayer granted defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

Grammatiki E. Tsatsani’s claims against Walmart, Inc. and Joshua Strudl were dismissed with prejudice, and the case was closed.

What happened

In Tsatsani v. Walmart, Inc., Grammatiki E. Tsatsani, who represented herself, sued Walmart and store manager Joshua Strudl under disability, family-leave, and state laws. The defendants asked the court to dismiss the complaint for failing to state a valid claim.

The court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation because no party objected to it. It adopted the recommendation that Tsatsani’s claims were filed too late and did not plausibly allege violations of the laws involved.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety and dismissed the action with prejudice. The court also ordered the case closed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tsatsani v. Walmart, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-09063
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Nov. 13, 2020

Background

Grammatiki E. Tsatsani, proceeding without a lawyer, brought claims against Walmart, Inc., described as her former employer, and Joshua Strudl, described as a Walmart store manager. Her complaint asserted claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and New Jersey and New York law.

The defendants moved to dismiss all of Tsatsani’s claims for failure to state a claim. Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses issued a Report and Recommendation advising that the motion be granted and that the claims be dismissed because they were untimely and did not plausibly allege a violation of an applicable law.

Court’s Analysis

Because no party objected to the Report and Recommendation, the district court reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. Judge Engelmayer found no such error and adopted the recommendation in full.

The court also adopted the recommendation that the claims be dismissed with prejudice and without permission to amend. It stated that this result was warranted because the claims were untimely and Tsatsani had already had an opportunity to effectively amend her complaint, despite representing herself.

The court further stated that the parties’ failure to file objections waived objections and prevented appellate review, based on the warning in the Report and Recommendation.

Disposition

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety and dismissed the action with prejudice. The Clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion, close the case, and mail Tsatsani a copy of the decision.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.