Cullum et al v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Corp. et al

Filing 55

ORDER: To the extent that the Court liberally construes the Notice of Appeal as another motion for reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 6.3 (see Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006)), the Court denies the Second Motion for Reconsideration because a "litigant is entitled to a single motion for reconsideration." Guang Ju Lin v. United States, No. 13-CV-7498-SHS, 2015 WL 747115, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 18, 2015). Successive motions for reconsid eration are not permitted because a "Court must narrowly construe and strictly apply Local Rule 6.3, so as to avoid duplicative rulings on previously considered issues[.]" Montanile v. Nat'l Broad. Co., 216 F. Supp. 2d 341, 342 (S.D .N.Y. 2002). Plaintiffs already made the arguments raised in the Second Motion in their First Motion for reconsideration, which was denied on the grounds that they had shown no controlling decisions or facts overlooked in the Order dismissing the action. The Second Motion for Reconsideration is denied. This order resolves docket entry no. 54. The Clerk of Court is also respectfully directed to mail Plaintiffs, at the addresses below, copies of this Order. SO ORDERED. Mail to: Sandra L. Cullum, 2770 West 5th Ave., Apt. 7A Brooklyn, NY 11224. Deirdre Saleh, 2675 W. 36th St., Apt. 1E Brooklyn, NY 11224. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/7/2025) (vfr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SANDRA L. CULLUM and DEIRDRE
SALEH,
Plaintiffs,
-vWYNDHAM HOTELS & RESORTS CORP.,
WYNDHAM DESTINATIONS INC., MR.
GEOFFREY A. BALLOTTI, WYNDHAM
HOTELS (WH) & RESORTS, INC., MS.
ELISABETH GALE, DBA WYNDHAM
CORPORATE OFFICE &
HEADQUARTERS, BROADRIDGE
CORPORATE ISSUER SOLUTIONS,

1:22-CV-09700-LTS-SN

Defendants.

ORDER
Plaintiffs filed this action pro se. By order dated February 12, 2024, the Court
dismissed this action with prejudice against all but one Defendant (1) pursuant to the Federal
Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. section 1 et seq., (2) for lack of personal jurisdiction, and
(3) for failure to state a claim. (Docket entry no. 49 (the “Order”).) On March 4, 2024, Plaintiffs
filed a “motion request for formal reconsideration” of the Order. (Docket entry no. 50 (the “First
Motion for Reconsideration”).) After the Court denied the First Motion for Reconsideration
(docekt entry no. 52), Plaintiffs filed a submission, styled as a Notice of Appeal, “to respectfully
request the reconsideration of the recent dismissal of [their] case” (docket entry no. 54 (the
“Second Motion for Reconsideration”) at 2).
To the extent that the Court liberally construes the Notice of Appeal as another
motion for reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 6.3 (see Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons,
470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006)), the Court denies the Second Motion for Reconsideration
CULLUM – MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

MARCH 7, 2025

1

because a “litigant is entitled to a single motion for reconsideration.” Guang Ju Lin v. United
States, No. 13-CV-7498-SHS, 2015 WL 747115, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 18, 2015). Successive
motions for reconsideration are not permitted because a “Court must narrowly construe and
strictly apply Local Rule 6.3, so as to avoid duplicative rulings on previously considered
issues[.]” Montanile v. Nat’l Broad. Co., 216 F. Supp. 2d 341, 342 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). Plaintiffs
already made the arguments raised in the Second Motion in their First Motion for
reconsideration, which was denied on the grounds that they had shown no controlling decisions
or facts overlooked in the Order dismissing the action.
The Second Motion for Reconsideration is denied. This order resolves docket
entry no. 54. The Clerk of Court is also respectfully directed to mail Plaintiffs, at the addresses
below, copies of this Order.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: New York, New York
March 7, 2025

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN
United States District Judge

Mail to:
Sandra L. Cullum
2770 West 5th Ave., Apt. 7A
Brooklyn, NY 11224
Deirdre Saleh
2675 W. 36th St., Apt. 1E
Brooklyn, NY 11224

CULLUM – MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

MARCH 7, 2025

2