Sherr v. Board of Elections in the City of New York
- Rochon
- 1:23-cv-08693
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Sherr v. Board of Elections, Judge Rochon granted the Board’s motion to dismiss Brandon Sherr’s FLSA overtime claims but allowed amendment.
Brandon D. Sherr’s FLSA overtime claims were dismissed, but he was given 21 days to file an amended complaint; the Board’s motion to dismiss was granted.
What happened
In Sherr v. Board of Elections in the City of New York, Brandon Sherr sued the Board under the Fair Labor Standards Act for allegedly unpaid overtime and sought money and injunctive relief.
A magistrate judge recommended granting the Board’s motion to dismiss because the claims appeared filed after the FLSA’s usual two-year deadline. The recommendation said a three-year deadline could apply if the alleged violations were willful and recommended allowing Sherr to amend his complaint to add facts about willfulness.
Because neither side timely objected, Judge Jennifer L. Rochon reviewed the recommendation for clear error, adopted it in full, granted the Board’s motion to dismiss, and gave Sherr 21 days to file an amended complaint. The court also stated that the lack of timely objections precluded appellate review of the decision.
The detailed version
- Sherr v. Board of Elections in the City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-08693
- Rochon
- Feb. 27, 2024
Background
Brandon D. Sherr brought an overtime-pay action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), seeking monetary and injunctive relief from the Board of Elections in the City of New York. The Board moved to dismiss the complaint.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Aaron recommended granting the motion to dismiss. The recommendation found that Sherr had alleged FLSA overtime violations with sufficient specificity, but concluded that the claims were barred by the FLSA’s general two-year statute of limitations. It explained that a three-year limitations period would apply if the alleged violations were willful. Because Sherr might be able to add facts concerning willfulness, the recommendation advised granting him leave to amend his complaint.
The recommendation warned that objections were due by February 26, 2024, and that failing to object would waive further judicial review and preclude appellate review. Neither party filed objections.
Ruling
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon reviewed the recommendation for clear error because no timely objections were filed. She found its reasoning sound and not clearly erroneous, adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety, and granted the Board’s motion to dismiss. The court also granted Sherr leave to file an amended complaint within 21 days of the Report and Recommendation. The court stated that the absence of timely objections precluded appellate review of the decision. The opinion does not state whether Sherr ultimately filed an amended complaint.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.