Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 3, 2021

Daly v. Westchester County Board of Legislators

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:19-cv-04642
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Preliminary InjunctionCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Daly v. Westchester County Board of Legislators, Judge Halpern denied Daly’s request for an order restoring him to the County payroll.

Who this affects

Dante Edoardo Daly’s request for restoration to the Westchester County payroll was denied; the Westchester County Board of Legislators opposed the request.

What happened

Daly v. Westchester County Board of Legislators concerns Dante Edoardo Daly’s request that the court extend his time on Westchester County’s payroll so he could pursue disability retirement.

Daly said he was terminated on March 1, 2018, left the County payroll on April 6, 2018, and missed the 90-day deadline to apply for disability retirement. He asked the court to order the County to restore him to its payroll.

Judge Philip M. Halpern treated the request as a request for a preliminary injunction and denied it. The court said Daly had not shown likely irreparable harm, likely success on his claims, or sufficiently serious legal questions with the balance of hardships favoring him, while also noting that it was uncertain whether the court had jurisdiction to grant the requested relief.

The detailed version

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

Case
Daly v. Westchester County Board of Legislators · No. 7:19-cv-04642
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Mar. 3, 2021

Background

Dante Edoardo Daly, representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees, alleged that the Westchester County Board of Legislators discriminated against him, including under the Americans with Disabilities Act. He asked the court to extend his presence on the County payroll so the New York State and Local Retirement System could process his disability-retirement application.

Daly stated that he was terminated on March 1, 2018, that April 6, 2018 was his last day on the County payroll, and that he was required to apply for disability retirement within 90 days afterward. His application was denied because he did not apply within the required period. He then asked the court to direct the County to restore him to its payroll. The County opposed the request.

Legal standard

The court treated Daly’s request as one for a preliminary injunction, which is temporary court-ordered relief issued before a final decision. To obtain one, Daly had to show likely irreparable harm without the injunction and either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious legal questions for litigation, with the balance of hardships strongly favoring him. The court described preliminary injunctive relief as an extraordinary remedy requiring a clear showing.

Ruling

Judge Philip M. Halpern denied Daly’s request. The court stated that, at that stage—and assuming the court even had jurisdiction to grant the requested relief—Daly had not established likely irreparable harm, likely success on the merits, or sufficiently serious questions on the merits combined with a favorable balance of hardships. The order did not decide the underlying discrimination allegations.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.