Nnebe v. City of New York

Background

Elsie Nnebe, proceeding without a lawyer, sued the City of New York, the New York City Department of Education, Reida Barry-Grant, Lisette Olivo, and John Werner. The opinion identifies Barry-Grant as a principal, Olivo as an assistant principal, and Werner as a Department of Education teacher who formerly served as Nnebe’s union representative.

Nnebe asserted discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Her claims arose from charges brought against her for using corporal punishment and failing to supervise students.

Motions and Recommendation

Werner moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). The City Defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). Nnebe opposed the motions and alternatively requested permission to amend her complaint.

Magistrate Judge Cave recommended granting the defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motions and allowing Nnebe to amend specified claims. The recommendation covered claims against the City and the Department of Education under Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act; claims against the City Defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law; and aiding-and-abetting claims against Werner under the two New York human-rights laws. The court also adopted the recommendation to treat Nnebe’s § 1981 claims as § 1983 claims.

Nnebe objected, but the court found that her objection merely stated that none of her claims should have been dismissed and did not provide a substantive explanation. Because the objection was perfunctory, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni adopted Magistrate Judge Cave’s report and recommendation in full and granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss. Nnebe’s Title VII and Age Discrimination in Employment Act claims against Barry-Grant, Olivo, and Werner were dismissed with prejudice. Her remaining claims were dismissed without prejudice, and she was granted leave to amend the following claims:

The court identified possible additional facts Nnebe could include in an amended complaint, including facts supporting discriminatory motive, legally protected complaints, continuous hostile conduct, a municipal policy causing any constitutional violation, and Werner’s contribution to alleged discrimination. The court ordered any amended complaint filed by March 17, 2023, encouraged the parties to notify the court if they wanted mediation, and directed the clerk to close the two pending motions.