Skip to content
Freelancer RightsKnow what you are owed, and why

Court dispute group

Petty v. Maison Hospitality Furnishings et al.

Records preserved here
1 record — an opinion count, not a count of dockets or filings
Court(s)
U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Docket number(s)
SDNY 1:25-cv-06342, Document 26
Citation(s)
None reported
Latest record in this collection
September 1, 2026 — this is the latest document collected, not a docket-status check
Where these records came from
decision_watch_candidates (Codex daily discovery), approved by the owner on September 8, 2026

Read this alongside the records

  • Pleading-stage decision. Every fact recited in the opinion is an allegation the court assumed true for the motion; nothing here is a finding of liability, and no payment or damages judgment has been entered.
  • The original 32-page court PDF of Document 26 is preserved here unmodified, together with page-aware text extracted from it. Page citations on this page refer to the PDF's own pages.

Opinion history

Ordered oldest to newest. Summaries describe what each document says; they do not endorse any court’s reading of the statute.

  1. September 1, 2026Direct FIFA rulingRecord 1

    Petty v. Maison Hospitality Furnishings et al.

    Court
    U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
    Docket
    SDNY 1:25-cv-06342, Document 26
    Why it is here
    NYS FIFA and NYC FIFA timely-payment and retaliation claims by a remote freelance marketing contractor against an out-of-state hiring party.
    Preserved summary of what the court did
    Magistrate Judge Netburn (on consent) granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss. The motion was denied as to the NYS FIFA payment claim (Count I), the NYC FIFA payment claim (Count II), the alternative breach-of-contract claim (Count III), the NYS/NYC FIFA retaliation claim (Count IV), the NYLL § 740 retaliation claim (Count V) and Count VII; the defamation claim (Count VI) was dismissed without prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction. Pleading-stage decision only — no liability finding and no damages judgment.
    Award
    No damages awarded in this ruling
    Claim amount
    Amended Complaint alleges roughly $36,000 in unpaid wages and an invoice of $37,594.08; amounts are allegations, not findings
    Ultimate outcome
    Not verified
    Issues
    NYS vs NYC FIFA; effective date and pre-existing agreements; hiring party; territorial nexus for remote work; retaliation; personal jurisdiction
    Where this appears in the document
    Original PDF pages: NYS FIFA claim (Count I) at pp. 18–21, including the August 28, 2024 effective-date discussion; NYC FIFA scope and territorial-nexus analysis (Count II) at pp. 21–24; FIFA retaliation (Count IV) at pp. 25–27 and NYLL § 740 retaliation (Count V) at pp. 27–29; conclusion at p. 32.
    Review scope
    Opinion relevance and stated ruling only; full docket and later treatment not comprehensively checked.

    Source and saved documents

Citation connections

Quoted citations in the saved opinion

Each line below was read in the saved document itself, with the page it appears on. A citation shows that the court referred to the other matter; it is not an endorsement of the outcome, and this is not a full table of authorities.

  • Quoted in the documentThis matter cites Maplebear Inc. (d/b/a Instacart) v. City of New York et al.

    …Original PDF, p. 18: The NYS FIFA provides wage protections for freelance workers, such as Plaintiff, and is modeled off a similar New York City law that was passed in 2017. See Maplebear Inc. v. City of New York, No. 25-CV-9979 (JGK), 2026 WL 181637, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 22, 2026)…

  • Quoted in the documentThis matter cites Ortiz et al. v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. et al.

    …Original PDF, p. 18: Ortiz v. Consol. Edison Co. of New York, Inc., 801 F. Supp. 3d 260, 276–77 (S.D.N.Y. 2025)…

  • Quoted in the documentThis matter cites Varn v. Orchestrade, Inc.

    …Original PDF, p. 11: See e.g., Varn, 2020 WL 13558690, at *6 (finding that an out-of-state defendant supervising the plaintiff’s work “via text message, phone, or email” while Plaintiff was located in New York, supported a showing that defendant transacted business in New York)…

  • Quoted in the documentThis matter cites Monzano-Moreno v. Libqual Fence Co., Inc.

    …Original PDF, p. 21: See Monzano-Moreno v. Libqual Fence Co., No. 18-CV-0161 (MKB)(AKT), 2021 WL 730663, at *18 (Feb. 5, 2021), report and recommendation adopted, 2021 WL 688295 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 23, 2021)…

  • Quoted in the documentThis matter cites Turner v Sheppard Grain Enters., LLC

    …Original PDF, p. 23: See, e.g., Turner, 68 Misc. 3d at 388 (applying an impact standard to determine that a freelance worker was not entitled to the protections of the NYC FIFA because he was not a New York City resident and he performed the “vast majority” of his work from another state)…

  • Quoted in the documentThis matter cites Van Den Berg v Clinton Hall Holdings, LLC

    …Original PDF, p. 22: See, e.g., Eelco Van Den Berg v. Clinton Hall Holdings, LLC, 2019 WL 2995777, at *3 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. July 9, 2019) (applying the NYC FIFA to a claim brought by a resident of the Netherlands who performed freelance work on a mural located in New York City)…

Limits on this entry

No comprehensive later-treatment research, full-docket retrieval or payment verification was performed for this matter. Saved files are copies of public records, not certified copies. Snapshot date: September 8, 2026. Full methodology and coverage.