🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Anne Y. Shields

United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York 10 signed orders read

How Judge Shields decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On limitations defenses she enforces the discovery rule rigorously: inquiry notice -- suspicion of fraud sufficient to prompt a reasonable inquiry -- starts the clock, and a plaintiff cannot defer accrual until litigation later confirms the suspicion. She also rejects fraudulent-concealment tolling absent a triable showing of reasonable diligence.

“plaintiff was on inquiry notice of Saunders' fraud and that plaintiff failed even to establish a triable issue of fact on whether she had conducted a reasonable inquiry concerning Saunders' assets”

On ERISA Section 404(a) fiduciary-breach pleading she imports the securities-law materiality standard (Ballone v. Eastman Kodak) and treats materiality as a fact-specific inquiry unsuited to resolution on a 12(b)(6) motion; allegations of long-term acceptance of contributions plus benefit statements plausibly state a breach at the pleading stage.

“misrepresentations are material if they would induce a reasonable person to rely upon them ... Determining the materiality of misstatements is a fact-specific inquiry.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Rolle v. Girardi
2:15-cv-01745 · 2016-03-07
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Judge Shields' R&R (Docket Entry 16) is ADOPTED in its entirety and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Balila v. Nassau County
2:16-cv-00646 · 2017-06-12
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The Court has reviewed the record and, finding no clear error, adopts the R & R as the opinion of the Court. The Court grants defendants' motion to dismiss.”

Koral v. Saunders
2:17-cv-07011 · 2020-09-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“defendants' motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is granted; defendants are granted judgment as a matter of law dismissing plaintiff's claims against them in their entirety with prejudice”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is denied”

Blue Castle (Cayman) Ltd. v. Gallagher
2:24-cv-06104 · 2025-07-17
Default judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Blue Castle's Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 9) is granted, with rates and hours for attorney's fees as set forth in the R&R. The Court awards Blue Castle $1,608,499.93”

McCaffery v. McCaffery
2:11-cv-00703 · 2018-04-02
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“United States Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields issued a Report and Recommendation in which she recommended that the defendant's motion to dismiss be granted in part and denied in part.”

Performing Arts Center of Suffolk County (Gateway) v. Actor's Equity Association
2:20-cv-02531 · 2022-09-30
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Equity Dismissal Motion (ECF No. 30) is GRANTED”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“the Funds Defendants Dismissal Motion (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part in accordance with Magistrate Judge Shields' recommendation”

Sibley v. Choice Hotels International, Inc.
2:14-cv-00634 · 2016-03-07
Motion for sanctions (plaintiff) Denied

“For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's motion set forth in Docket Entry No. 116 is denied in its entirety.”

Reyling v. Three Village Central School District
2:23-cv-00266 · 2025-08-13
Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“Upon such construction, and for the reasons set forth below, the Reylings' motions are deemed made and are denied.”

Balcioglu v. Sachem Central School District
2:24-cv-04758 · 2026-03-25
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court finds that Defendant Sachem Central School District offered Plaintiff C.B. a free and appropriate education for the 2022-2023 school year. Accordingly, Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted in its entirety.”

Cimen v. Starbucks Corporation
2:23-cv-07706 · 2026-05-13
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's for summary judgment is granted in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and to close this case.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median motion-to-ruling time: 66 days (N = 1).

Three strands. (1) Referral civil docket: a current-assignment sample is dominated by single-plaintiff FLSA/NYLL wage cases, plus ADA-employment, consumer/product-liability, contract, and immigration (USCIS mandamus) matters, on which she handles pretrial, discovery, and reports & recommendations. (2) Consent docket: she occasionally presides through trial where the parties consent (e.g. a FELA case tried in 2020). (3) A steady magistrate-duty criminal calendar (complaints/removals). FLSA dominance is consistent with her published FLSA-protocol reputation. Case durations are not attributed: the older cases sampled reached her by referral or by late reassignment for trial, not from filing.

Put Judge Shields's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Shields actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Shields's own signed orders and cites them.