Michael A. Telesca

United States District Court for the Western District of New York district Deceased · served 1982–2020 Appointed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) 18 signed orders read

Judge Telesca no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Telesca decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Telesca enforced settlement terms by comparing the promised accessibility feature with what the defendant actually constructed.

“Because the current sod-covered inclines do not constitute ramps as required under the Agreements, I grant plaintiffs motion to enforce the settlement agreements.”

Telesca allowed a retaliation claim to proceed where the employee’s reasonable good-faith belief could not be resolved from the pleadings.

“the issue of whether or not the plaintiff held a reasonable belief that the defendant was violating the FSMA can not be determined from the pleadings”

Telesca ordered payment of benefits when the developed record established disability and another administrative round would add nothing.

“In the present case, further administrative proceedings would serve no purpose. Accordingly, remand for the calculation of benefits is warranted.”

Procedural preferences

Telesca treated temporal proximity alone as insufficient to show that an employer’s stated performance concerns were pretextual.

“the temporal proximity between plaintiffs medical absences and her negative performance evaluations is insufficient to demonstrate that WICSD’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions was pretextual.”

Telesca enforced administrative exhaustion where the claimant received clear notice and still did not pursue the available appeal.

“He was advised in clear, unequivocal language, and thus lost an opportunity to have his denial reviewed prior to commencement of this action.”

Telesca reduced a fee request where billing and settlement conduct did not reasonably advance the clients’ interests.

“The Court will not reward Plaintiffs’ attorneys for letting issues of attorneys' fees cloud their judgement in doing what was primarily in the best interests of their clients.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Little v. Landsman Development Corp.
· 2014-06-05
Motion to enforce settlement (tenants) Granted

“For the reasons set forth above, I grant plaintiffs motion to enforce the settlement agreements, and ORDER defendants to install compliant ramps at their expense within 60 days of the date of this Order.”

Reed v. Aqueon Products
· 2014-12-09
Summary judgment (product defendants) Granted in part

“For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment in part.”

Austin v. Town of Farmington
· 2015-06-08
Summary judgment (homeowners) Denied

“For the reasons set forth above, the Court denies plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and grants defendant’s motion dismissing the complaint in its entirety with prejudice.”

Motions to dismiss (town) Granted
Fox v. Lifemark Securities Corp.
· 2015-01-08
Summary judgment (securities defendants) Granted

“I find that there exists no genuine dispute as to any material questions of fact and therefore grant summary judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety with prejudice.”

Klemme v. West Irondequoit Central School District
· 2014-11-24
Summary judgment (school district) Granted

“Accordingly, T grant defendant’s motion for summary judgement dismissing the complaint with prejudice.”

Amos ex rel. Estate of Amos v. Biogen Idec Inc.
· 2014-06-25
Motions to dismiss (drug manufacturers) Granted in part

“For the reasons set forth above, I grant defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs design defect claims, and New York General Business Law Claim with prejudice. I grant defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs fraud claim without prejudice, and deny defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs strict liability claim based on failure to warn, and claim for negligent misrepresentation.”

Miller v. Colvin
· 2015-08-17
Judgment on the pleadings (Commissioner of Social Security) Denied

“For the‘foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt # 8) is denied.”

Judgment on the pleadings (benefits claimant) Granted

“Plaintiffs motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt # 7) is granted and the Commissioner’s decision is reversed and remanded for calculation and payment of benefits.”

Mendez v. Radec Corp.
· 2012-11-01
Motion for attorney fees and costs (employee class) Granted in part

“For the reasons set forth herein, Plaintiffs are awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. Defendants are hereby ordered to pay Plaintiffs $420,000 in attorneys’ fees and $53,793.10 in costs, for a total of $473,793.10.”

Chase v. Brothers International Food Corp.
· 2014-02-27
Motions to dismiss (food company) Denied

“Accordingly, I find that Chase has stated a prima facie case of retaliation, and I deny defendant’s motion to dismiss.”

Tailored Lighting, Inc. v. Osram Sylvania Products, Inc.
· 2011-05-16
Motion for reconsideration (patent owner) Denied

“For the reasons set forth above, plaintiffs motion for reconsideration is denied, defendant’s motion to amend the judgment is granted, and the defendant’s motion for an award of attorneys fees is denied.”

Motion to amend judgment (manufacturer) Granted
Motion for attorney fees (manufacturer) Denied
Velazquez v. Barnhart
· 2007-11-01
Motion for remand (benefits claimant) Granted

“For the reasons set forth above, I grant plaintiffs motion for remand and order that the Commissioner’s determination denying benefits is vacated, and that this matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings consistent with this Decision and Order.”

Hadley v. Rush Henrietta Central School District
· 2006-01-10
Preliminary injunction (student and parents) Granted

“For the reasons set forth below, I grant plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, and stay this action pending resolution of current administrative proceedings before the New York State Commissioner of Education.”

Motions to dismiss (school district) Denied

“Pursuant to the stay of further proceedings discussed above, I deny defendant’s motion to dismiss without prejudice to refile once the plaintiffs’ proceedings before the New York State Commissioner of Education are completed.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The sampled matters included tort, civil-rights, criminal, foreclosure, pharmaceutical, prisoner, statutory, and naturalization proceedings. Sparse entry text and the short-lived late-tenure cohort do not support broad duration or base-rate conclusions.

A historical record

Judge Telesca no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.