Farber v. City of Paterson

Full title: ROBERTA FARBER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF PATERSON, JOSE TORRES, ELIESER…

Court: United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Date published: Jul 20, 2004

No. Civ 03-4535 (DRD) (D.N.J. Jul. 20, 2004)

Opinion

No. CIV 03-4535 (DRD).

July 20, 2004

Amended ORDER

DICKINSON DEBEVOISE, Senior District Judge

This matter having come before the Court upon motions of Plaintiff, by and through her attorneys Graham, Curtin Sheridan, for leave to amend her Complaint, and of Defendants, by and through their attorneys Lite DePalma Greenberg Rivas, LLC (attorneys for the City of Paterson, Mayor Torres, Burgis and DiPasquale — "City Defendants") and Szaferman, Lakind, Blumstein, Blader, Lehman Goldshore, P.C. (attorneys for Local 3474 — "the union"), for an Order dismissing certain claims in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint; and the Court having heard and considered all arguments of counsel in support of, and in opposition to, these motions, and the Court having considered the papers submitted by all parties; and for good cause shown;

IT IS on this 20^th day of July, 2004, ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend her Complaint is GRANTED.

IT IS further ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims under the federal and state constitutions that she was deprived of her property interest in her job without due process of law are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IT IS further ORDERED that the City Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's (1) claims under the federal and state constitution that she was deprived of a liberty interest in her reputation without due process of law, (2) wrongful discharge claim, and (3) § 1985 (3) conspiracy claim is DENIED.

IT IS further ORDERED that the union's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's (1) claim for breach of the duty of fair representation and (2) § 1985 (3) conspiracy claim is DENIED.

* * * *

This order involves two controlling questions of law as to which there are substantial grounds for difference of opinion. Those questions are:

1. Are people who share a political affiliation a cognizable class for § 1985(3) purposes?

2. Which statute of limitations applies to a claim brought in court for a union's breach of the duty of fair representation that is enunciated in the New Jersey EERA?

An immediate appeal of the court's resolution of these two questions may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.