Paul A. Crotty
How Judge Crotty rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Crotty
Paul Austin Crotty is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Crotty received a commission on April 15, 2005. Judge Crotty assumed senior status on August 1, 2015.
Judge Crotty's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Crotty, 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.
- Civil Case Management Plan ↗
- Individual Rules of Practice ↗
- Sentencing Procedures ↗
- Telephone Calls to Judge Crotty ↗
Key rules
Filing
Submit two marked courtesy copies of motion papers to chambers when the papers are served.
“I. Courtesy Copies of Motion Papers Two (2) courtesy copies of all motion papers, marked as such, shall be submitted to Chambers at the time the papers are served, in accordance with the SDNY policies regarding mail deliveries.”
Motions
Civil motions generally require a pre-motion conference, subject to the listed exceptions.
“A. Pre-Motion Conferences in Civil Cases As described below (Rule 3C and 3D), a pre-motion conference with the Court is required before making any motion, except:”
Discovery
Before bringing a discovery dispute, confer in person or by telephone and then request a conference with the court.
“Discovery disputes arising under Rules 26 through 37 or Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure shall be heard only if the moving party has first conferred in good faith by telephone or in person with all other relevant parties in an effort to resolve the dispute. If this conference has not resolved the issue(s) raised, the moving party must inform the relevant parties during the conference that the moving party intends to seek relief from the Court on such issue(s). The moving party must thereafter promptly request a conference with the”
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 8, 2026).
- Amended Standing Order on Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Second Amended Standing Order on Civil Case Opening ↗
- Amended Standing Order on Miscellaneous Civil Case Opening ↗
- Standing Order on Applications to File a Civil Case Under Seal ↗
- Standing Order on Emergency Relief and Section 2255 Filing Procedures ↗
- Notice on Immigration Custody Habeas Petitions and Emergency Relief ↗
How Judge Crotty decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
At the conditional-certification stage, a concrete but modest showing of a shared unlawful policy can be enough, and declarations or hearsay may support notice.
“Plaintiffs’ burden at this stage is minimal; Plaintiffs need only make a ‘modest factual showing’ that they and potential opt-in plaintiffs ‘ “together were victims of a common policy or plan that violated the law.” ’”
Procedural preferences
He distinguishes generalized proof from individualized proof when testing whether class-wide issues predominate.
“Class-wide issues predominate if ‘resolution of some of the legal or factual questions ... can be achieved through generalized proof,’ and are ‘more substantial than the issues subject only to individualized proof.’”
Cautions
He treats post-employment blacklisting and interference as capable of undermining whistleblower protections.
“Moreover, a contrary holding would discourage employees from exposing fraudulent activities of their former employers for fear of retaliation in the form of blacklisting or interference with subsequent employment.”
In a copyright dispute, he denied summary judgment on statutory damages for a catalog because the plaintiffs had not shown when the alleged infringement began; discovering an image online did not establish the start date.
“Merely offering the date they discovered the photos on Defendants’ site is not sufficient.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“NYPPP’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.”
“The Bankruptcy Court’s order dated September 5, 2014 (Bankr. Dkt. 12258) is AFFIRMED.”
“Plaintiffs motion for conditional certification of the collective action, to compel Defendant to provide information regarding situated employees for the six-year period prior to this lawsuit, and for court-authorized notice under § 216(b) of the FLSA is GRANTED, subject to the modification of Plaintiffs’ proposed notice detailed above”
“Defendant’s motion to dismiss the Title VII and ADEA claims is GRANTED, and the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss.”
“The Court grants Plaintiffs motion for class certification.”
“Defendants’ motion, to dismiss is granted.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. ACI and Messers. Presser, Misseri, and Cestaro are added to this action as additional defendants, but Plaintiff’s claim under NYLL § 195 is disallowed.”
“The motion to dismiss the portion of Plaintiffs SOX claim concerning his post-employment deposition testimony is DENIED; the motion to dismiss the DFA claim is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss the tortious interference with contract claim is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss the tortious interference with business relations claim is DENIED; and the motion to dismiss the defamation claim is GRANTED with respect to the statements by Arora and DENIED with respect to the statements by Slowikowska.”
“The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(a), to consolidate: 10 Civ. 3461,10 Civ. 3493,10 Civ. 3595, 10 Civ. 3616, 10 Civ. 4786, and 10 Civ. 4812.”
“the Pension Group’s motion (document # 18 in 10 Civ. 3461) for appointment as lead plaintiff is GRANTED, and its choice of co-lead counsels is approved”
“All other applications for designation as lead counsel and selection of counsel are DENIED.”
“the motion to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction or, in the alternative, to transfer the action to the Central District of California, is denied.”
“The motion to disqualify Plaintiffs counsel, Raymond J. Markovich, is granted.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 657 days (N = 8).
Half of the sampled matters involved labor, employment, or ERISA claims; the remainder spanned post-conviction, securities, immigration, and education-related disputes.
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 | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 3 | 11 |
| Sep 2023 | 1 | 220 |
| Mar 2023 | 1 | 189 |
| Sep 2022 | 1 | 144 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 61 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 12 |
| Mar 2021 | 7 | 11 |
| Sep 2020 | 6 | 10 |
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 Southern District of New York, not for Judge Crotty: 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 | 9,565 | 5.6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,749 | 3.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 6,416 | 5.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1,313 | 14.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 87 | 51.7 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 9,565 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 10,695 | 6.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 10,316 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 11,818 | 6.1 months |
| Sep 2021 | 10,662 | 5.7 months |
| Sep 2020 | 10,118 | 6.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 11,357 | 6.6 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 Crotty with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Crotty, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Crotty's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace