Source-linked public-record research into lawsuits, outcomes, repeated litigation, judicial findings, public statements and chronology of conduct.
7:23-cv-00244 · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
This page separates court findings, party filings, research classifications and public statements. Unknown or unresolved fields remain labelled as such.
Outcome reason: After ordering Tufano to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and receiving his response, the court dismissed the action under Rule 12(h)(3) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Research status: Source-backed
Research notes: Defendants were the American Arbitration Association, Jeffrey K. Davis, Esq., Adam Starowicz and Sarah Thompson. The case was filed two days after Starowicz's Jan. 9, 2023 motion to dismiss C090, according to the Davis Cantor article. A separate New York state action against the same four defendants, C091, was filed Feb. 1, 2023. This is treated as related parallel litigation, not the same action or a post-judgment refiling.
After issuing an order to show cause and receiving Tufano's response, the court dismissed the action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, without prejudice to an appropriate state-court action.
Court source ↗Sequence does not by itself prove motive or causation.
Two days after the reported motion to dismiss C090, Tufano filed C099 in S.D.N.Y. against the American Arbitration Association, Jeffrey K. Davis, Adam Starowicz and Sarah Thompson.
Source ↗The federal court ordered Tufano to show cause why C099 should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Source ↗After receiving Tufano's show-cause response, the court dismissed C099 without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Source ↗The next day, Tufano filed C091 in Westchester Supreme Court against the same four defendants named in C099: AAA, Jeffrey Davis, Adam Starowicz and Sarah Thompson.
Source ↗Commentary from former counsel or other secondary sources is retained separately from court findings and primary-source records.
Davis recounts the Starowicz/Tufano business arbitration, reproduces language from an arbitrator stating that a preliminary hearing occurred Oct. 25, 2021 and that a request to pause/stay was addressed by email around Apr. 5, 2022, and reports that Starowicz filed a motion to dismiss C090 on Jan. 9, 2023. The article later notes the state case was settled and claims voluntarily dismissed with prejudice.
Evidentiary treatment: Use for leads, chronology and quoted arbitration context only. Davis's characterizations (for example that arguments were meritless or that Tufano tried to circumvent arbitration) are not court findings unless independently corroborated.
Secondary source ↗