Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:20-cv-03843
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Judge Engelmayer compelled arbitration of Garnes’s employment claims and stayed the entire case, including his contract claim.
Mark Garnes’s employment and breach-of-contract claims against Pritchard Industries, Inc.; the entire case is stayed while arbitration proceeds.
What happened
In Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc., pro se plaintiff Mark Garnes sued his former employer, Pritchard Industries, Inc., over employment-related claims and breach of contract. Pritchard asked the court to dismiss the case or require arbitration.
A magistrate judge recommended requiring arbitration of Garnes’s employment claims and pausing the entire case, including the contract claim. Neither party objected to that recommendation. The court reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer adopted the recommendation, compelled Garnes to arbitrate the employment claims, and stayed the entire case pending arbitration. The court did not decide the alternative recommendations about the claims because it required arbitration.
The detailed version
- Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-03843
- Paul Engelmayer
- June 13, 2023
Background
Pro se plaintiff Mark Garnes brought claims against his former employer, Pritchard Industries, Inc. The opinion’s opening paragraph identifies the statutory claims as claims under “Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” citing 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e and following, and also describes a breach-of-contract claim. Pritchard moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss the amended complaint as time-barred and for failure to state a claim. Alternatively, Pritchard asked the court to require arbitration and to stay or dismiss the case while arbitration proceeded.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave recommended that the court require Garnes to arbitrate the employment claims and stay the entire action, including the breach-of-contract claim. The report also made alternative recommendations about other claims if the court denied the request to compel arbitration. Because the court granted the request to compel arbitration, it did not review or comment on those alternative recommendations.
Court’s Analysis
No party objected to the report. The court therefore reviewed the report for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. After reviewing Judge Cave’s report, the court found no facial error and adopted the report in its entirety. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review, based on the warning in the report.
Disposition
The court compelled Garnes to arbitrate the employment claims and stayed the entire case, including the breach-of-contract claim, pending arbitration. The opinion does not decide the underlying merits of those claims. It also directs the Clerk of Court to mail the decision to Garnes at the address on file.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.