Scales v. New York Hotel and Motel Trades Council, Local 6

Background

In an earlier opinion and order, the court dismissed William Scales’s second amended complaint for failure to state a claim for breach of the duty of fair representation. The court found that Scales had not alleged that the defendant’s actions were arbitrary, discriminatory, or taken in bad faith, rather than merely negligent. The court gave Scales until March 8, 2023, to file another amended complaint and warned that the case would be dismissed if he did not do so.

Scales filed a February 7, 2023 letter discussing his requested damages, the conduct of the defendant’s counsel, and the defendant’s efforts to resolve the litigation. The court determined that the letter was not an amended complaint, dismissed the case with prejudice, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.

Scales’s Later Filings

On April 5, 2023, Scales asserted that his February 7 letter was “actually [his] amended complaint” and attached an altered version bearing an “Amended Complaint” heading. The court allowed him until April 18, 2023, to explain how the letter could qualify as an amended complaint and how it corrected the deficiencies identified in the earlier order.

In his April 18 filing, Scales said the letter should be treated as an amended complaint because it estimated damages caused during the litigation, including delay involving an arbitration motion. He did not explain how the letter addressed the earlier pleading deficiencies and repeatedly described the defendant’s conduct as “neglect.”

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that Scales had not changed its determination that the February 7 letter was not an amended complaint. The court also stated that the case was properly terminated on April 3, 2023, after Scales failed to file an amended complaint.

The court added that, even if it treated the February 7 letter as an amended complaint, the letter did not fix the defects in the second amended complaint. It primarily discussed the defendant’s and its counsel’s conduct during the litigation and a concurrent arbitration, rather than the conduct underlying Scales’s claims. The letter therefore did not show how the prior pleading deficiencies were remedied.

Disposition

The April 26, 2023 order left in place the prior dismissal with prejudice and the termination of the case. The opinion does not state a separate grant or denial of a motion in this order.