MIGADDE v. PERMANENT MISSION OF REPUBLIC OF UGANDA TO UNITED NATIONS (2024)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lyle E. Frank, J.), entered July 13, 2022, which denied plaintiff's pro se motion for summary judgment and ordered sanctions in the amount of $250 against plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied pro se plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on his complaint alleging employment discrimination under the New York City Human Rights Law, which the court (Kathryn E. Freed, J.), by order dated June 16, 2020, previously had ordered dismissed.  After plaintiff filed six unsuccessful motions raising the same issues, including four motions to renew, reargue, and/or vacate prior orders, the court (Lyle E. Frank, J.), by order dated April 12, 2022, directed plaintiff to obtain leave of court before making any further motions.  Plaintiff failed to do so before filing a motion for summary judgment and offered no justification for not seeking leave.  Accordingly, the motion was properly dismissed without consideration of the merits (see Sibersky v. Winters, 42 A.D.3d 402, 404–405, 840 N.Y.S.2d 66 [1st Dept. 2007]).

The court's imposition of sanctions of $250 was a provident exercise of discretion.  Plaintiff's repetitive motions and violation of the court's order to seek leave of court constituted frivolous conduct (see 22 NYCRR 130–1.1;  William P. Pahl Equip. Corp. v. Kassis, 182 A.D.2d 22, 32, 588 N.Y.S.2d 8 [1st Dept. 1992], lv dismissed in part, denied in part 80 N.Y.2d 1005, 592 N.Y.S.2d 665, 607 N.E.2d 812 [1992];  Matter of Shapiro v. Hayes, 133 A.D.3d 468, 469, 19 N.Y.S.3d 287 [1st Dept. 2015]).  The court's April 12, 2022 order stated that defendant's cross-motion for sanctions was “resolved in that plaintiff must obtain prior leave of [c]ourt to make any further motions,” and that the court would “consider sanctions on future motions as warranted.”  The Clerk of the Court's stamp on plaintiff's notice of motion did not constitute leave of the court.

Finally, sanctions for plaintiff's pursuit of this appeal are not warranted at this juncture (cf.  Levy v. Carol Mgmt. Corp., 260 A.D.2d 27, 31–35, 698 N.Y.S.2d 226 [1st Dept. 1999]).