This case involves five former court interpreters for the New York Unified Court System Office of Court Administration who were terminated after failing required English proficiency examinations. The plaintiffs, who worked with languages including Bengali, Hindi, Wolof, and others, sued under Title VII, the ADEA, and related state and local laws, alleging that the exams were developed and administered in a discriminatory manner based on race and national origin; some also raised claims against their union for inadequate representation. The defendants moved to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), with the union alternatively seeking summary judgment. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation in full after reviewing the parties' objections, granting the union's motions entirely and granting in part and denying in part the OCA's motions based on issues including administrative exhaustion, timeliness, and failure to state claims.
Plaintiffs, bus drivers and mechanics employed by the New York City Transit Authority, sued manufacturers of urban transit buses and diesel engines for negligence and strict product liability, alleging personal injuries from exposure to diesel exhaust fumes caused by defective vehicle designs that violated Clean Air Act emissions standards and by inadequate warnings about the fumes. After plaintiffs abandoned design defect claims that sought stricter emissions controls, the remaining claims asserted that the vehicles failed to meet CAA standards and that defendants negligently failed to warn of latent dangers. The court granted defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), dismissing all claims. The Clean Air Act preempts state common-law claims relating to emissions control, provides no private right of action, and the failure-to-warn claims were either preempted or failed to plead proximate causation; spousal derivative claims were likewise dismissed.
In this case, Napster sued Rounder Records for breach of contract, seeking indemnification for costs from copyright infringement lawsuits over musical compositions in sound recordings supplied under 2001 and 2006 agreements for Napster's online music service. The court granted Rounder's motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). It dismissed the 2001 contract claim because that agreement was rescinded and superseded by the 2006 contract, extinguishing any breach claims. The 2006 contract claim was dismissed because Napster failed to obtain the required advance consent for settlements and because the agreement did not obligate Rounder to procure mechanical licenses for the compositions at issue.
This case involved Anderson News, a major magazine wholesaler, suing various magazine publishers, distributors, and other wholesalers, alleging they conspired in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act to boycott Anderson and drive it out of business by cutting off its supply of magazines. Anderson also brought claims for tortious interference with business relationships and civil conspiracy. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that the complaint failed to plausibly allege an antitrust conspiracy under the Twombly standard. The court reasoned that Anderson's own proposal of a surcharge on magazines, presented as a non-negotiable ultimatum, explained the publishers' actions more plausibly than a collusive scheme, and there were insufficient facts to show agreement beyond parallel conduct.
The case involved Christine Arakelian's claims against her former employer Omnicare for breach of contract, violations of the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law, and a declaratory judgment regarding the enforceability of non-compete and non-solicitation provisions in her employment agreements. The dispute centered on Omnicare's failure to pay severance benefits and unused vacation time after her termination without cause in 2009, along with the validity of post-employment restrictions. The court granted in part and denied in part both parties' summary judgment motions, holding that Omnicare breached the contract by withholding severance but that Arakelian had waived the full amount sought through a later agreement, that no unused vacation time existed under company policy, that Maryland law did not apply to bar recovery under the Wage Payment Act, and that the non-compete and non-solicitation clauses were unenforceable. The core reasoning relied on contract interpretation under New York law, factual determinations about vacation accrual and agreements signed, and choice-of-law analysis showing insufficient contacts with Maryland.
The case involves two consolidated breach-of-contract actions brought by the successors of Brazilian songwriters Antonio Jobim and Vinicius de Moraes against Songs of Universal, Inc. The disputes arose from 1960s subpublishing agreements granting Universal limited rights to exploit compositions such as "The Girl from Ipanema" in specified territories in exchange for royalty payments, including provisions on mechanical rights, synchronization licenses, English lyric adaptations by Norman Gimbel, and territorial scope. Plaintiffs alleged multiple violations, including improper royalty reductions tied to the Gimbel agreements, underpayments despite later rate adjustments, and unauthorized licensing outside the licensed territories. In the liability phase, the district court addressed cross-motions for partial summary judgment by interpreting the contract language on royalty calculations, deductions, and assignment rights, granting plaintiffs' motions in part on certain royalty and licensing claims while denying them on others due to factual disputes, such as whether Hong Kong qualified as an English-speaking territory under the agreements.