Adams v. Bloomberg L.P.

Background

Sheena Adams sued Bloomberg L.P. under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Four other individuals—Anthony Provenzale, Rodrick Telford, Keerti Hariharan, and Amber Adam—also opted in as plaintiffs. Bloomberg moved for summary judgment on Adams’s claims in the Second Amended Complaint.

In connection with that motion, Bloomberg filed a statement of material facts under Local Civil Rule 56.1. Adams responded and submitted additional facts. Bloomberg then filed a letter-motion seeking permission to submit a reply statement of material facts, arguing that Adams’s responses treated facts as disputed without specifically addressing them and instead raised new facts.

Report and recommendation

Magistrate Judge Cott recommended granting Bloomberg permission to file the reply statement. He reasoned that Local Rule 56.1 does not expressly provide for or prohibit such replies and that a reply was appropriate under the circumstances because Adams’s responses appeared to raise new, unrelated facts.

Adams objected to that recommendation. The district court noted that Adams had not opposed Bloomberg’s letter-motion before Judge Cott. The court therefore reviewed the new arguments in her objection for clear error rather than conducting a full reconsideration of the issue.

Ruling

Judge Ronnie Abrams found no error, and specifically no clear error, in Judge Cott’s recommendation. The court explained that although Local Rule 56.1 does not provide for reply statements, it also does not prohibit them, and courts in the district had permitted them in similar circumstances. The court also noted its discretion to overlook violations of local rules and agreed that allowing the reply was consistent with the rule’s purpose of streamlining summary-judgment proceedings.

The court adopted the recommendation and granted Bloomberg leave to file its Reply 56.1 statement. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate Bloomberg’s pending letter-motion at ECF No. 151. The court did not decide Bloomberg’s summary-judgment motion or Adams’s motion for leave to amend; objections to those matters were to be filed, briefed, and resolved separately.