Nelson S. Roman
How Judge Roman rules, drawn from 9 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Roman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He applies the McDonnell Douglas / Iqbal-Twombly framework with attention to comparator allegations: a Title VII plaintiff who pleads that similarly-situated employees outside the protected class were treated more favorably (e.g., male probationary officers who violated rules but kept their jobs) can survive a motion to dismiss. A plaintiff should plead concrete comparators and an inference of discriminatory intent rather than conclusory labels.
“Defendant now moves, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to dismiss the Complaint in its entirety. For the following reasons, Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED.”
Procedural preferences
He resolves discrimination cases against religious-institution employers at summary judgment on the ministerial exception where the plaintiff's role was primarily religious (a chaplain's ministry to patients), barring Title VII claims. A litigant in a faith-based-employer dispute should expect the ministerial-exception threshold to be applied before the merits.
“Defendants assert that (a) the ‘ministerial exception’ to discrimination cases bars the claims asserted by this ministerial employee against his religious institution employer ... For the following reasons, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted.”
Dismisses prisoner civil-rights claims at the pleading stage where the filing timeline makes exhaustion of the three-step grievance process impossible and the complaint does not plausibly allege that administrative remedies were unavailable.
“Thus, it is mathematically impossible for Plaintiff to have fulfilled the entire three-step grievance process within any of those listed timeframes above.”
Cautions
On a multi-defendant Rule 12(b)(6) motion he rules defendant-group by defendant-group rather than all-or-nothing: dismissing the claims against one group entirely while letting some claims against another group proceed. A plaintiff should anchor the complaint's strongest factual allegations to each specific defendant, since a thinly-pleaded defendant may be dismissed even as the case survives against others.
“the Town Defendants' motion is GRANTED and the Library Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Before the Court is Defendant Navigators Group, Inc.'s (‘Defendant’) motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff Jennifer Yang's (‘Plaintiff’) claims for violations of the anti-retaliation provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (‘SOX’), 18 U.S.C. 1514A, and the whistleblower protection provision of the Dodd-Frank Act (‘DFA’), 15 U.S.C. 78u-6(h)(i). For the following reasons, Defendant's motion is GRANTED.”
“Defendants now move, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a), for summary judgment on the remaining claims. Defendants assert that (a) the ‘ministerial exception’ to discrimination cases bars the claims asserted by this ministerial employee against his religious institution employer, and (b) in the alternative, no reasonable jury could find for Plaintiff on his claims of discrimination and retaliation. For the following reasons, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“Each defendant group has moved to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the following reasons, the Town Defendants' motion is GRANTED and the Library Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“the Town Defendants' motion is GRANTED and the Library Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“Defendant now moves, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to dismiss the Complaint in its entirety. For the following reasons, Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ due process claims are dismissed with prejudice, and Plaintiffs’ takings claim is dismissed without prejudice.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Credit One’s motion for leave to appeal the Bankruptcy Court’s order denying its motion to strike class allegations and dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
“the Government’s application for the involuntary medication of Defendant is GRANTED.”
“Additionally, Defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment is DENIED without prejudice—motions must be filed by Defendant’s counsel.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court AFFIRMS the Bankruptcy Court’s order denying Credit One’s motion to compel arbitration.”
“Accordingly, Credit One’s motion to expedite the appeal and motion to stay the Bankruptcy Court proceedings are mooted.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Judge Roman sits at the White Plains courthouse. The visible docket slice is current and 2026-heavy: alien-detainee and general habeas, civil-rights/employment, contract, insurance, copyright, and a civil-rights-other matter. Reflects current assignments, not a tenure-wide caseload; the only terminated docket on the visible page is a days-long procedural termination.
Draft for Judge Roman with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Roman, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Roman's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace