Stinson v. CUCF

Background

On March 10, 2022, the court barred Marcus Stinson from filing new actions without paying filing fees that asserted employment-discrimination or retaliation claims against the City University of New York and its employees concerning his prior employment there. The bar required him to obtain the court’s permission before filing such an action without paying fees.

Stinson then filed this pro se action against CUCF. He asserted claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the New York City Human Rights Law, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York State Civil Service Law. He also sought permission to proceed without paying filing fees. Stinson stated that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had issued him a notice of right to sue on August 2, 2022, based on an amended charge that added new events and CUCF.

Arguments and Analysis

Stinson asserted that he had not received a full and fair opportunity to litigate his claims against CUCF in his earlier cases. He alleged that CUNY and the Research Foundation of CUNY had concealed that certain individuals were CUCF employees for purposes of litigation. He also contended that this complaint did not assert employment-discrimination or retaliation claims against CUNY and its employees.

The court rejected those characterizations. It found that the action was not a departure from Stinson’s pattern of filings arising from his former employment at CUNY. The court concluded that Stinson was essentially asking it to review the results of earlier cases that had already been decided and closed.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action without prejudice. It directed the Clerk of Court to mail Stinson a copy of the order, record service on the docket, and issue judgment. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal.