Mary Kay Lanthier
How Judge Lanthier decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Applies the heightened mandatory-injunction standard rigorously: purely financial injury, even if substantial and ongoing, does not satisfy the 'strong showing of irreparable harm' a mandatory injunction requires when it is ultimately compensable by a damages award at trial.
“These alleged damages are insufficient to make a strong showing of irreparable harm given that a monetary award following trial would provide adequate compensation.”
In a multi-motion third-party-complaint dismissal ruling, applies the Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard consistently across near-identical motions from several movers, distinguishing them on whether the pleading ties the specific mover to specific deficient work rather than treating similarly-worded motions as fungible; a bare conclusory tie to a general defect category is not enough to survive.
“Neither the Third-Party SAC nor the Second Amended Complaint (incorporated by the Third-Party SAC) pleads any plausible factual allegations that Jarvis deficiently performed any work in the Development.”
Procedural preferences
Treats a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss filed after an answer as a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings applying the identical standard, rather than rejecting it on procedural grounds.
“The Second Circuit has made clear that even if a defendant has answered a complaint, a motion to dismiss, although styled as a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, could and should be considered as a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's request for a mandatory injunction is hereby DENIED.”
“CORRECTED ORDER re 105 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment. The motion is GRANTED as to Counts VII and VIII and DENIED as to Count II and Barton's request for future damages. Signed by District Judge Mary Kay Lanthier on 10/28/2025.”
“Davis's Motion to Dismiss Counts V and VI (Doc. 222) is DENIED.”
“Jarvis's Motion to Dismiss Counts I and II (Doc. 223) is GRANTED.”
“Sprague's Motion to Dismiss Counts XV and XVI (Doc. 227) is DENIED.”
“Barney's Motion to Dismiss Counts XIX and XX (Doc. 212) is DENIED.”
“Hamilton's Motion to Dismiss Counts XI and XII (Doc. 242) is DENIED.”
“Stevens's Motion to Dismiss Counts XIII and XIV (Doc. 240) is DENIED.”
“Dlubac's Motion to Dismiss Counts IX and X (Doc. 247) is DENIED.”
“The court DENIES the Motion to Amend with respect to Jarvis's claims and otherwise GRANTS the Motion to Amend.”
Put Judge Lanthier's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Lanthier actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Lanthier's own signed orders and cites them.