Source-linked public-record research into lawsuits, outcomes, repeated litigation, judicial findings, public statements and chronology of conduct.
57677/2025 · New York State Supreme Court
This page separates court findings, party filings, research classifications and public statements. Unknown or unresolved fields remain labelled as such.
Outcome reason: The court denied the pro se motion and dismissed the complaint. It found the motion defective and apparently unserved, found no claim within the New York court's subject-matter jurisdiction, held that the state court could not review or vacate federal court orders, and stated that the claims were not cognizable under New York law.
Research status: Source-backed
Research notes: NYSCEF Case Status: Disposed. The decision expressly states that this matter is related to Index No. 50058/2023 (C091), where plaintiff had discontinued all claims against Jeffrey Davis on March 9, 2023.
Court denied plaintiff's motion and dismissed the complaint, finding no claim within its subject-matter jurisdiction, explaining that a New York Supreme Court cannot review or vacate federal court orders, and stating that the complaint's claims were not cognizable under New York law. The decision also identified C091 as a related prior action.
Court source ↗Strength labels are research classifications, not judicial declarations that the litigant is vexatious.
The 2025 decision expressly identified C091 as related, where claims against Jeffrey Davis had previously been discontinued with prejudice; C094 was dismissed for lack of cognizable state-law/jurisdictional basis.
Source ↗Sequence does not by itself prove motive or causation.
Tufano later filed C094 against Jeffrey Davis in Westchester Supreme Court.
Source ↗The court dismissed C094, finding no cognizable claim within its subject-matter jurisdiction and explaining that a state court could not review or vacate federal court orders; the decision expressly identified C091 as related.
Source ↗