Quirino v. The New Jewish Home
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:19-cv-05778
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Quirino v. The New Jewish Home, Judge Engelmayer granted TNJH’s motion and dismissed Quirino’s amended complaint.
Editha Lopez Quirino’s amended complaint was dismissed, and the case was closed. The opinion does not separately describe the effect of the dismissal on each defendant.
What happened
In Quirino v. The New Jewish Home, Editha Lopez Quirino alleged that The New Jewish Home and two individuals discriminated against her because of her age and sex. The court had previously allowed her to replead only a claim that The New Jewish Home failed to promote her under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, but her amended complaint did not include that claim and instead reasserted earlier claims and added claims under other federal, state, and city laws.
The New Jewish Home moved to dismiss the amended complaint under rules concerning jurisdiction, service, and whether the complaint stated a valid claim. Quirino did not oppose the motion, even after the magistrate judge gave her additional time to do so. The magistrate judge recommended granting the motion, and no party objected.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, adopted it in full, granted The New Jewish Home’s motion, and dismissed Quirino’s amended complaint. The clerk was directed to close the case.
The detailed version
- Quirino v. The New Jewish Home · No. 1:19-cv-05778
- Paul Engelmayer
- Jan. 14, 2022
Background
Editha Lopez Quirino filed the case without a lawyer and alleged age and sex discrimination by The New Jewish Home (TNJH), Maia Santarina, and Jenifer Tutone. The defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). After the motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman, Judge Freeman recommended granting it in full.
The district court adopted that recommendation with one modification: it allowed Quirino to file an amended complaint asserting only a claim that TNJH, her former employer, failed to promote her in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Quirino later filed an amended complaint through counsel. The amended complaint did not assert the permitted Age Discrimination in Employment Act claim. Instead, it reasserted her original claims and added claims under Title VII, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law.
Motion and recommendation
TNJH moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Rules 12(b)(1), 12(b)(5), and 12(b)(6). The motion was referred to Judge Freeman for a report and recommendation. After Quirino did not oppose the motion, Judge Freeman ordered her to file any opposition by November 19, 2021. Quirino did not do so. Judge Freeman then recommended granting the motion.
Court’s analysis
Because no party objected to the report and recommendation, the court reviewed it for clear error. That means the court checked the record for an obvious mistake rather than conducting a full reconsideration of the unobjected-to recommendations. Judge Engelmayer stated that the report was thorough and well reasoned and that he found no facial error. He therefore adopted the report in its entirety.
The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived objections and precluded appellate review, consistent with the warning in the report. The opinion does not separately explain the reasoning for each claim in the amended complaint; it incorporates the factual summary in Judge Freeman’s report.
Disposition
The court granted TNJH’s motion and dismissed Quirino’s amended complaint. The clerk was directed to close the case. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.