requisite particularity to support a claim against Mr. O'Connell.
Judge Cipriani is charged with adopting, in an administrative capacity, a policy "whereby his law clerk is authorized to act in his behalf to deprive rights, to quash papers before they are filed, to prevent access to the courts and any other action necessary to ensure the discriminatory practices of the courts are protected and women continue to receive an 'unfair settlement' under guise of 'equity justice.'" Complaint, para. 44. This is the extent of plaintiff's factual allegations directly concerning Judge Cipriani. The allegations lack the requisite particularity to support a claim against Judge Cipriani.
Plaintiff's grievance against Mr. Grunfeld appears simply to be that the manner in which Mr. Grunfeld handled the divorce action was unsatisfactory to plaintiff. Plaintiff's specific allegations are that Mr. Grunfeld has aided Mrs. DeFerro in continuing to deprive plaintiff use or the fair value of his property, that Mr. Grunfeld attempted to get plaintiff to sign a consent form, apparently against his wishes,
and that Mr. Grunfeld has impeded plaintiff's attempts at discovery. These allegations do not support a claim against Mr. Grunfeld. Plaintiff also claims that Mr. Grunfeld acted "in concert" with Mr. Coco because although letters plaintiff sent to Mr. Coco were allegedly never sent to Mr. Grunfeld, Mr. Grunfeld showed a communication with Mr. Coco on his bill to plaintiff. This allegation lacks the requisite particularity to support a claim against Mr. Grunfeld.
In conclusion, plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim against any of the moving defendants for lack of particularity.
The motion to compel discovery will be denied as moot. An appropriate order follows.
AND NOW, this 14th day of April, 1989, upon consideration of the Motion to Dismiss of defendants Judge Bradley, Judge Cipriani, Coco and O'Connell, the Motion to Dismiss of Defendant, David I. Grunfeld, and plaintiff's Brief/Memorandum Opposing Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Compel Discovery, and in accordance with the foregoing Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. The Motions to Dismiss are GPANTED.
2. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery is DENIED as moot.