William M. Skretny
Judge Skretny no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Skretny decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a pension-offset dispute, the judge read an ambiguous plan provision against the drafter once the employer's own conduct (delaying enforcement for years, then applying it retroactively) showed the plan administrator's post-hoc interpretation was not the plan's plain meaning.
“Defendants must pay Plaintiffs the full benefits to which they are entitled under the Plan (retroactive and prospective) without reduction for workers' compensation payments received, consistent with this Court's articulation of the Plan's plain meaning herein.”
On a personal-jurisdiction challenge by a foreign manufacturer, repeated, knowing shipment of goods into New York over a long-running commercial relationship established purposeful availment even though the defendant never handled delivery logistics itself.
“Pektron purposely engaged in multiple transactions totaling over $1 million in sales, with affirmative knowledge that the goods were destined for New York. For the purposes of New York's long-arm statute, it has thus supplied those goods in the state.”
In a debt-collector standing dispute over civil forfeiture, actual use, control, and financial responsibility for a vehicle established a possessory interest sufficient to contest forfeiture, regardless of the government's strawman theory based on the vehicle's high value relative to the claimed owner's income.
“he purchased the Vehicle; he held title to the Vehicle; he insured the Vehicle; he maintained the Vehicle; he held the keys to the Vehicle; he drove the Vehicle 75% of the time ... this is a sufficient showing of possessory interest to confer standing.”
Procedural preferences
The judge holds a Federal Arbitration Act motion to compel to summary-judgment-like evidentiary standards: a movant who substantiates entitlement to arbitrate with evidence shifts the burden to the opposing party to come forward with a genuine factual dispute, not a bare denial.
“If the party seeking arbitration has substantiated the entitlement by a showing of evidentiary facts, the party opposing may not rest on a denial but must submit evidentiary facts showing that there is a dispute of fact to be tried.”
On reconsideration, the judge will revisit even his own prior summary-judgment ruling once a jurisdictional defect (lack of Article III standing) is identified, holding that a court that lacks subject-matter jurisdiction cannot have properly reached the merits of any pending motion, however the earlier order was styled.
“Once this Court found that Plaintiff lacked standing, this Court also lost subject matter jurisdiction. ... The parties' Motions (Docket Nos. 52, 53) are terminated rather than ruled upon.”
The judge readily grants leave to amend a complaint early in a case when no defendant shows resulting prejudice, even while a motion to dismiss is pending, and will resolve the dismissal motion against the amended pleading rather than the superseded one.
“No defendant has filed an opposition to Plaintiff's cross-motion. ... Defendants have provided no grounds on which they would be prejudiced. ... this Court will grant leave to amend and resolve the two motions to dismiss as against the second amended complaint.”
Cautions
A litigant who waits until a reply brief to first identify the contractual or legal authority supporting a disputed fee or charge will not get credit for it; the judge treats that as an improperly raised new argument.
“"new arguments may not be made in a reply brief" ... this principle is particularly apt here where Hallmark was unable to respond to the potentially pivotal argument that he is bound by an agreement -- heretofore unmentioned -- that permitted Defendants to recover court costs.”
On post-trial motions, the judge will trim an attorney's-fee or costs award to what the record actually supports even while otherwise upholding the jury's underlying liability verdict, rather than treating the fee petition as a rubber stamp.
“Anello's motion for attorneys' fees is granted, but with a reduced fee award; and Anello's Bill of Costs is granted, but with a reduced costs award.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT HEREBY IS ORDERED, that the government's Motion to Dismiss Justin Magness's Petition (Docket No. 339) is GRANTED. FURTHER, that Justin Magness's Petition (Docket No. 329) is DISMISSED.”
“Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 62) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, consistent with the foregoing decision.”
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 61) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, consistent with the foregoing decision.”
“IT HEREBY IS ORDERED that the summary judgment motion of Defendants County of Erie, Erie County Sheriff's Office, John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 (Docket No. 23) is GRANTED”
“the summary judgment motion of Defendants Lindsey Styborski and the SPCA (Docket No. 24) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”
“the summary judgment motion of Defendant Carolyn A. Robinson (Docket No. 25) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“the government's motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, to dismiss Payne's claim for lack of standing. For the following reasons, the government's motion to dismiss is denied, but its motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“Pektron now moves to dismiss this action for lack of personal jurisdiction. For the following reasons, that motion is denied.”
“Defendants' motions for judgment on the pleadings are denied”
“Hallmark's motion to certify this case as a class action is granted”
“his motion to strike is denied as moot”
“The Bills now move to dismiss each claim and compel Hojnowksi to pursue this dispute in arbitration. For the following reasons, that motion is granted.”
“Defendant's motion is granted and Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.”
“Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part”
“Anello's motion for attorneys' fees is granted, but with a reduced fee award”
“Anello's Bill of Costs is granted, but with a reduced costs award.”
“Pending before this Court is the Town's Motion for Summary Judgment. (Docket No. 27.) For the reasons discussed below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.”
“the motions by State, Assembly, and Silver are granted, and the motion by Gabryszak is denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 241 days (N = 1).
The sampled dockets spanned employment discrimination (age, religion, and disability), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act consumer suits, an ADA public-accommodations claim, and a motor-vehicle personal-injury case, alongside a large volume of Social Security appeals and Monsanto Roundup product-liability filings visible at the case-enumeration level. Several sampled cases resolved by settlement or voluntary/stipulated dismissal rather than a contested ruling, consistent with a civil docket where most cases do not reach judgment.
A historical record
Judge Skretny 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.