Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Sprada v. Cheektowaga

Sprada v. Cheektowaga

Ratings: (0)|Views: 302|Likes:
Published by Daniel T. Warren
MOL in Support of 12(b) motion to dismiss and strike in Sprada v. Cheektowaga
MOL in Support of 12(b) motion to dismiss and strike in Sprada v. Cheektowaga

More info:

Published by: Daniel T. Warren on Nov 15, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

11/18/2013

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK  ________________________________________ LISA SPRADA, Plaintiff, vs. TOWN OF CHEEKTOWAGA, Civil Action No. 1:13-CV-00985-A Defendant.  _________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DEFENDANT TOWN OF CHEEKTOWAGA IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO STRIKE
Case 1:13-cv-00985-RJA Document 10 Filed 10/30/13 Page 1 of 25
 
 - i -
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .........................................................................................1
 
A.
 
Introduction. .............................................................................................................1
 
B.
 
Procedural Background. ...........................................................................................1
 
C.
 
Grounds for Motion. ................................................................................................2
 
II. DISMISSAL STANDARD ..................................................................................................3
 
III. IN RULING ON THE SUBJECT RULE 12(b)(6) MOTION, THE COURT MAY CONSIDER DOCUMENTS REFERENCED IN OR RELIED UPON IN THE PREPARATION OF THE COMPLAINT ...........................................................................4
 
IV. ARGUMENT .......................................................................................................................7
 
POINT I THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (DISCRIMINATION) SHOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE SPRADA CANNOT ALLEGE THAT THE TOWN WAS NEGLIGENT IN THE HANDLING OF HER COMPLAINTS. ......................................................7
 
A.
 
The Town Provided a Reasonable Avenue for Complaint. .............8
 
B.
 
The Town Was Not Negligent in Responding to Sprada’s Complaints. ......................................................................................9
 
POINT II THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (RETALIATION) SHOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE THE TOWN HAS NOT TAKEN ANY ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTION AGAINST SPRADA. ...................................................................................................15
 
POINT III SPRADA MAY NOT CLAIM PUNITIVE DAMAGES. .........................17
 
POINT IV THE COMPLAINT CONTAINS REPULSIVE LANGUAGE CONCERNING NON-PARTIES AND DETRACTS FROM THIS COURT’S DIGNITY. ................................................................................17
 
V. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................20
 
Case 1:13-cv-00985-RJA Document 10 Filed 10/30/13 Page 2 of 25
 
 - ii -
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page C
ASES
 
Adam v. Northstar Location Servs., LLC,  No. 09-cv-10632010 ................................................................................................................18 Avgerinos v. Palmyra-Macedon Cent. Sch. Dist., 690 F. Supp.2d 115 (W.D.N.Y. 2010) .......................................................................................4 Begay v. Public Serv. Co. of N.M., 710 F. Supp. 2d 1161 (D.N.M. 2010) ......................................................................................18 Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 545 (2007
)
 ...............................................................................................................3, 4 Britt v. Buffalo Mun. Hous. Auth.,  No. 06-cv-00575 (SR), 2008 WL 4501929 (W.D.N.Y. 2008) ................................................18 Brown v. Baldwin Free Sch. Dist., 603 F. Supp. 2d 509 (E.D.N.Y. 2009) .....................................................................................17 Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998) .................................................................................................................14 Ceglia v. Zuckerberg,  No. 10-cv-00569(F), 2012 WL 503810 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2012) ........................................19 Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2002), remanded to No. 00-cv-2839, 2003 WL 749422 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2003) ............................................................................................................4 City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc., 453 U.S. 247 (1981) .................................................................................................................17 Cortec Indus., Inc. v. Sum Holding L.P., 949 F.2d 42 (2d Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 960 (1992) .............................................4, 7 Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc.,  No. 96 civ. 8099 (JSR), 1997 WL 598462 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 1997), aff’d, 202 F.3d 560 (2d Cir. 2000) ....................................................................................................................16 Danieu v. Teamsters Local 264,  No. 08-cv-005005, 2011 WL 1259839, a *7 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2011) ...............................16
Case 1:13-cv-00985-RJA Document 10 Filed 10/30/13 Page 3 of 25

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->