Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 1, 2023

Doe v. Pistilli

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:22-cv-02654
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureCivil Rights
In one sentence

In Doe v. Pistilli, Judge Rochon transferred the Fair Housing Act case to the Eastern District of New York for convenience.

Who this affects

Jane Doe and the defendants are affected because the entire action was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York, where the pending requests may be addressed.

What happened

Doe v. Pistilli concerns Jane Doe’s Fair Housing Act claim that defendants discriminated against her because of sex by refusing to renew her lease after she rejected sexual advances from her building superintendent.

The court decided not to address Doe’s request to amend her complaint or her request for a temporary restraining order. Instead, it examined where the case should proceed and found that the plaintiff, one defendant, the building, and the likely witnesses and documents were in the Eastern District of New York.

Judge Rochon ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the Eastern District of New York under the federal convenience-and-justice transfer law. The scheduled March 6, 2023 conference was canceled, and the receiving court could address the pending requests after the transfer.

The detailed version

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

Case
Doe v. Pistilli · No. 1:22-cv-02654
Judge
Rochon
Date
Mar. 1, 2023

Background

Jane Doe brought one claim under the Fair Housing Act, a federal law that prohibits discrimination in housing. On February 27, 2023, she asked for permission to amend her complaint based on facts that had arisen during the preceding month. She also requested a temporary restraining order, but did not identify an imminent harm or a date by which she wanted the restraint imposed. The defendants asked for a conference concerning her request to file a new complaint.

Transfer Analysis

Before addressing those requests, the court concluded that the case should be transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. Federal law permits transfer to a district where the case could have been brought when transfer would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice.

The court found that the relevant factors favored transfer. Doe resides in Astoria, Queens, which is in the Eastern District of New York, so her choice of the Southern District received less weight. The alleged conduct occurred in the building where she lives, also in Queens. Defendant Sajo Kolenovic lives in Astoria, and Pistilli Realty Group and 30-86 323nd Street LLC allegedly manage the building. The court stated that witnesses and documents related to the claim would presumably be found in the Eastern District of New York.

Ruling

The court ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. It canceled the March 6, 2023 telephone conference and stated that the court receiving the case could address Doe’s pending requests after the transfer. The opinion did not decide whether Doe could amend her complaint, whether she was entitled to a temporary restraining order, or whether her Fair Housing Act claim had merit.

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.