Lee G. Dunst
How Judge Dunst rules, drawn from 21 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Dunst
Lee G. Dunst became a United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of New York in 2022. Based in Central Islip, he earned degrees from Brown University and New York University School of Law.
Judge Dunst's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Dunst, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
Request a pre-motion conference by letter motion of no more than three pages before filing a dispositive motion.
“A letter motion (not to exceed three (3) pages) requesting a pre-motion conference is required before any dispositive motion may be filed.”
Conferences
Request an adjournment or extension in writing at least three business days in advance absent an emergency.
“All requests for adjournments of a court appearance or extensions of time (including any court-ordered deadlines), absent an emergency, shall be made in writing at least three (3) business days prior to the scheduled appearance or deadline.”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 10, 2026).
How Judge Dunst decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Freedom Mortgage Corp. v. Brocking, he recommended denying an unopposed foreclosure default judgment because the lender had not shown compliance with New York’s pre-suit notice requirement.
“Because ‘failure to strictly comply with section 1304 is a sufficient basis to deny foreclosure relief,’ the Court must deny the Motion.”
In Agudelo v. Recovco Mortgage Management LLC, he recommended dismissing the claims against moving defendants with prejudice after repeated amendments had not cured the identified pleading defects.
“the TAC represents 'Plaintiffs' fourth bite at the apple . . .'”
Procedural preferences
In New Falls Corp. v. Soni Holdings, LLC, he recommended reducing a contempt-related fee award by excluding time spent on an improper letter motion and unsupported hours.
“The Court should reject Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fee requests for the 2.3 hours spent on the improper January 21, 2020 letter motion to Judge Spatt”
In Rafter v. Everlast Sign & Service Inc., he recommended conditional FLSA collective certification with a three-year notice window and a 45-day opt-in period rather than the longer periods requested.
“the notice should provide a 45-day opt in period, rather than a 60-day opt in period.”
In Zhuang v. Lucky Nail Spa Inc., he disqualified the plaintiff’s law firm after finding that a prospective client consultation had conveyed information that could significantly harm the defendant in the related wage litigation.
“the Court finds that such information could be significantly harmful.”
Cautions
In Marquess v. Cardflex, Inc., he recommended denying the defendants’ combined fee and sanctions motion with prejudice and treating their motions to strike as moot; District Judge Korman adopted the recommendation.
“he recommended that I deny with prejudice defendants’ motions for fees, costs, and sanctions, and deny as moot the motions to strike.”
Counsel disqualification remains a drastic remedy when the alleged prejudice is speculative or peripheral. In an advocate-witness challenge raised after years of litigation, he recommended denial because the proposed testimony concerned a narrow issue and the movants did not show a substantial likelihood of prejudice.
“The Court finds that Defendants have failed to come forward with ‘clear and convincing evidence’ to suggest testimony by Mr. Torczyner or other HKP staff would result in sufficient prejudice to justify disqualification.”
In the Shell trademark action, Dunst recommended denying a Rule 11 dismissal request without prejudice because discovery remained open and the asserted misconduct was intertwined with merits issues. District-judge adoption has not been verified.
“the undersigned recommends that Oil Depot’s Motion for Sanctions be denied without prejudice as premature.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the undersigned recommends that the Court deny the Motion and order that Plaintiff must file a letter attaching proof of compliance with Section 1304 before it may file another motion seeking a default judgment and any other relief.”
“the undersigned recommends that the Court award Plaintiff $6,483.51 in attorneys' fees and costs owed by defendants Soni Holdings, Kunal Soni, Anjali Soni, and 632 MLK BLVD JR LLC in connection with the Second Contempt Order”
“the Court ADOPTS the R&R. Accordingly, Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“On February 8, 2023, Magistrate Judge Lee G. Dunst issued a Report and Recommendation ... in which he recommended that I deny with prejudice defendants' motions for fees, costs, and sanctions, and deny as moot the motions to strike. ... I adopt the Report and Recommendation. I deny defendants' motion for fees”
“the Court dismisses the federal claims in the TAC as to the Moving Defendants with prejudice. ... As the R&R aptly puts it, the TAC represents 'Plaintiffs' fourth bite at the apple ...' The Court sees no reason to provide Plaintiffs a fifth serving.”
“On October 24, 2024, Magistrate Judge Lee G. Dunst, to whom I referred the Motion for Default Judgment, issued a Report and Recommendation ... I find no clear error and adopt the thorough and well-reasoned R&R in its entirety. Accordingly, I grant Empire's Motion for Default Judgment.”
“This Court referred the Motion to Magistrate Judge Lee G. Dunst, and, on April 10, 2025, Judge Dunst issued a Report and Recommendation ... Teoh's Motion for Attorney's Fees is granted in part, with reduced rates and hours as set forth in the R&R. ... $48,170.77 in attorney's fees and $8,382.25 in costs.”
“the undersigned recommends that the Court grant Plaintiffs’ motion to strike Eagle’s answer and grant Frog’s motion to strike Eagle’s pleadings.”
“The undersigned also recommends that the Court deny without prejudice Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment against Eagle and deny without prejudice Frog’s motion for default judgment against Eagle.”
“the undersigned respectfully recommends that the Court GRANT Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, DENY Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and DISMISS Plaintiff’s complaint.”
“the Court recommends granting Defendants’ summary judgment motion, denial of Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion, and dismissing all claims against Defendants with prejudice.”
“the undersigned respectfully recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion be DENIED WITH PREJUDICE insofar as Plaintiff seeks to add FMLA retaliation claims.”
“the undersigned respectfully recommends that Defendant’s Motion (ECF No. 15) be denied.”
“First, Plaintiff objects to Magistrate Judge Dunst’s November 9, 2022 Order, (ECF No. 243, ‘November 9 Order’), to the extent that it denies his motion for reconsideration of Magistrate Judge Dunst’s October 7, 2022 Order, (ECF No. 231), which denied Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of certain personnel and internal affairs records of Defendants.”
“Second, Plaintiff also objects to the November 9 Order’s denial of his motion for leave to serve additional interrogatories on Defendants Lamonica and Trifaro.”
“The Court adopts the well-reasoned R&R in its entirety as the opinion of the Court. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend his complaint, (ECF No. 211), is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The cases referred to him for a report and recommendation are filed under the referring district judge's number and so do not appear under his name; his directly-assigned and consent FLSA wage cases do appear under his name in the docket records, and they supply the durations and the docket-motion sample.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 3 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 4 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 6 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 4 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, not for Judge Dunst: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 7,392 | 6.7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,485 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 5,022 | 6.9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 835 | 13.9 months |
| Closed during trial | 50 | 49.6 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 7,392 | 6.7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,879 | 5.8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 7,746 | 5.1 months |
| Sep 2022 | 7,588 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2021 | 6,709 | 7.9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 6,062 | 8.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 6,858 | 8.1 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Dunst with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Dunst, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Dunst's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace