Cintron et al v. Orange County Community College, No. 7:2011cv01238 - Document 15 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION: For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint (Doc. # 9). Plaintiff's are granted to leave to file an amended complaint by October 21,2011. The Clerk is instructed to terminate this motion. re: 9 MOTION to Dismiss. filed by Orange County Community College. Motions terminated: 9 MOTION to Dismiss. filed by Orange County Community College. ( Amended Pleadings due by 10/21/2011.) (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 10/14/2011) (rj)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNrTED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC#: ---------------------------------------------------------------x D..\ TE LOUIS A CINTRON and WILLY CANCEL, Plaintiifs, ELECTRONICALLY FILED F;:-;;'L~E:::D-:~l;--~\---j-'-,1 l r - MEMORANDUM DECISION v. 11 CV 1238 (VB) ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Defendant. ---------------------------------------------------------------x Briccetti, J.: Plaintiffs Louis A Cintron and Willy Cancel bring this action alleging defendant violated their civil rights by discriminating against them on the basis of race and national origin. Plaintiffs' complaint states that this action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § ] 981a. Now pending is defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint (Doc. #9), on the ground that plaintiffs fail to state a legally cognizable claim. Section 1981 a is not an independent cause of action, but rather a remedy provision for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.c. §§ 2000e et seq. See Grahamv. Watertown City School Dist., 2011 WL 1344149, at *4 (N.D.N.Y. Apr. 8,2011). Because plaintiffs never filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, they are barred from bringing a Title VII claim. Therefore, defendant argues that plaintiffs' claim under Section 1981a must be dismissed. Plaintiffs explain in their opposition papers that they cited the wrong statute in their complaint. Plaintitls intended to bring suit under 42 U.S.c. § 198], which states an independent cause of action and does not require a Title VII claim to survive. Defendants do not dispute plaintiffs' explanation. Because the deficiencies in plaintiffs' complaint are due to a typographical error, plaintiffs will be given leave to amend their complaint under the proper statute. For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint (Doc. #9). Plaintiffs are granted to leave to file an amended complaint by October 21, 2011. The Clerk is instructed to terminate this motion. lY, 2011 Dated: October White Plains, NY SO ORDERE JtvJ Vincent L. Briccetti United States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
