Aldabe v. Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
- Analisa Torres
- 1:23-cv-00850
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Aldabe v. Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Judge Torres adopted an R&R, granted dismissal, and dismissed Aldabe’s conversion and emotional-distress claims with prejudice.
Fermin Aldabe’s claims for conversion and intentional infliction of emotional distress were dismissed with prejudice. The case against Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, James L. Bromley, and Fabio Weinberg Crocco was closed.
What happened
Fermin Aldabe, representing himself, sued Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, James L. Bromley, and Fabio Weinberg Crocco over their representation of Atlantic International Bank. After amending his complaint, Aldabe pursued claims for conversion and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The defendants moved to dismiss under federal rules governing jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein recommended exercising supplemental jurisdiction and granting the motion. No party objected to the recommendation.
Judge Analisa Torres found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court dismissed Aldabe’s claims with prejudice and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Aldabe v. Sullivan & Cromwell LLP · No. 1:23-cv-00850
- Analisa Torres
- Nov. 1, 2023
Background
Fermin Aldabe, proceeding without a lawyer, filed the action in New York state court against Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, James L. Bromley, and Fabio Weinberg Crocco. The claims concerned the defendants’ representation of an entity identified as Atlantic International Bank. Aldabe amended his complaint on January 13, 2023.
The defendants removed the case to federal court on February 1, 2023. Aldabe amended his complaint again on March 14, 2023, omitting his federal claims and asserting only conversion and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Motions and recommendation
The defendants moved to dismiss the second amended complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Rule 12(b)(1) concerns the court’s jurisdiction, and Rule 12(b)(6) concerns whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. The district court referred the motion to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein.
Judge Gorenstein issued a Report and Recommendation proposing that the district court exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Aldabe’s claims and grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Aldabe was notified of his right to object, but no objections were filed before the deadline.
Ruling
When no objection is filed, the district court reviews a magistrate judge’s recommendation for clear error. Judge Analisa Torres found no clear error and adopted Judge Gorenstein’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. It dismissed Aldabe’s claims with prejudice and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion and close the case. The order supplied here does not explain the underlying reasoning for dismissal beyond adopting the Report and Recommendation.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.