In Toulouse v. Village Diagnostic Treatment Center, No. 153806/2019, 2026 WL 3321285 (N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County Oct. 19, 2026), the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims of discrimination based on sexual orientation asserted under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws.
In sum, plaintiff, an openly gay male, alleged (among other things) that he was subjected to numerous derogatory and offensive comments and terminated because of his sexual orientation and in retaliation for exercising his rights. Initially, plaintiff sued in federal court, which ultimately granted defendant’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff did not appeal that decision, and commenced the present action.
In finding that plaintiff’s filing in this court was untimely, the court explained:
Under CPLR 3211(a), a party may move to dismiss on grounds including res judicata or statute of limitations under subsection (5) and failure to state a cause of action under subsection (7). The doctrine of res judicata bars subsequent actions between the same parties arising from the same claims and based on the same harm (Rojas v Romanoff, 186 AD3d 103, 108 [1st Dept 2020], citing Employers’ Fire Ins. Co. v Brookner, 47 AD3d 754 [2d Dept 2008]).
CPLR 205(a) allows a new action to be commenced within six months after termination of a prior timely action unless the earlier dismissal was for voluntary discontinuance, neglect to prosecute, lack of personal jurisdiction, or was a final judgment on the merits.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d), the statute of limitations for supplemental state-law claims is tolled while the claim is pending in federal court and for 30 days after dismissal, unless state law provides a longer tolling period.
Here, defendants’ motion is granted. Judge Vernon S. Broderick’s decision dated September 28, 201[8] dismissed plaintiff’s federal claims and declined supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims, dismissing the state claims without prejudice (NYSCEF Doc. No. 25). Under CPLR 205(a), plaintiff had six months–until March 28, 2019–to commence a new state action. Plaintiff did not file this action until April 12, 2019 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 1), approximately two weeks late.
The court concluded that the untimely filing renders plaintiff’s state-law claims barred by the applicable statute of limitations and subject to dismissal under CPLR 3211(a)(5).