Hon. Marian W. Payson

2003 – 2025 

Federal Judicial Service: 

  • Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court, Western District of New York.  Entered duty on April 14, 2003, and  reappointed to additional eightyear terms in 2011 and 2019. 

Education: 

  • Northwestern University School of Law, J.D., cum laude, 1984 
  • Duke University, B.A., magna cum laude, 1981 

 Professional Career: 

  • New York State Attorney General’s Office, AAG in Charge, Rochester Regional Office, 1999-2003 
  • Public Interest Law Office of Rochester, Rochester, New York, 1997-1999 
  • Deputy Chief Appellate Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York, 1994-1996 
  • Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York, 1990-1994 
  • Private Practice, Debevoise & Plimpton, New York, New York, 1985-1989 
  • Law Clerk, Hon. Wilbur F. Pell, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Chicago, Illinois, 1984-1985 

 Noteworthy Cases: 

EEOC v. Everdry Marketing Mgmt., Inc., No. 6:01-CV-06329: 

The EEOC filed suit on behalf of thirteen individual female claimants who worked as telemarketers for defendants, a waterproofing franchising business and one of its franchisees operated in Rochester.  The EEOC alleged that defendants acted as an integrated enterprise and subjected the claimants to physical and verbal sexual harassment.  The claimants and various of their family members testified about the psychological effects of the harassment on the claimants.  After a three-week trial in October 2006, the jury returned a verdict in favor of claimants, finding that they had been subjected to a sexually hostile work environment.  Each claimant was awarded both compensatory and punitive damages. 

EEOC v. Everdry Marketing Mgmt., Inc., 556 F. Supp. 2d 213 (W.D.N.Y. 2008), aff’d, 348 F. App’x 677 (2d Cir. 2009)
https://casetext.com/case/eeoc-v-everdry-marketing-management?q=EEOC%20v.%20Everdry%20Marketing%20Mgmt&sort=relevance&p=1&type=case&resultsNav=false https://casetext.com/case/eeoc-v-everdry-mktg-and-mgmt-inc?q=EEOC%20v.%20Everdry%20Marketing%20Mgmt&sort=relevance&p=1&type=case 

 

Doe v. Overfield, No. 6:08-CV-06294: 

This class action suit challenged the policy of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Services (“DOCCS”) of imposing a special condition of parole supervision prohibiting all parolees who had ever committed sexual misconduct from having any contact with any child under eighteen, even their own children.  Following extensive discovery and conferences with the Court to assist their efforts to resolve the claims, the parties agreed upon a new protocol obligating DOCCS to provide notice to parolees of their right to request parental contact with their children and to consider less restrictive alternatives to no contact when the other parent supports contact between the parolee and his or her children.  Following a fairness hearing, this Court approved the parties’ settlement agreement requiring DOCCS to implement the protocol. 

 

 Chart v. Town of Parma, No. 6:10-CV-06179: 

 

Plaintiff John Chart sued the Town of Parma pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 et seq., maintaining that the Town contaminated the Town’s park when it backfilled areas of the park with allegedly contaminated topsoil.  The topsoil used by the Town originated in a former apple orchard, and, according to Chart, pesticides including arsenic, lead, DDT, DDE and DDD were used in the orchard, resulting in contamination of the soil.  Chart sought an injunction requiring the Town to remediate the park, along with recovery costs and attorneys’ fees.  Judge Payson determined that Chart had standing to bring the action.  In 2014, Judge Payson denied in part the Town’s motion for summary judgment.  Judge Payson determined that although the Town had established that the topsoil did not constitute a “hazardous waste,” it failed to establish that the topsoil did not constitute a “solid waste” under RCRA and that issues of fact regarding whether the topsoil presented an “imminent and substantial endangerment to health or the environment” precluded judgment as a matter of law in favor of the Town.  Following denial of summary judgment, Judge Payson conducted a courtassisted settlement conference with the parties.  The parties resolved the action, and the Town agreed to a Site Management Plan for the park, which included provisions for regular inspections, maintenance and repair, and use limitations, with the objective of minimizing any potential exposures. 

Chart v. Town of Parma, 2014 WL 4923166 (W.D.N.Y. 2014)
https://casetext.com/case/chart-v-town-of-parma 

 

McKnight v. Vasile, No. 6:11-CV-06328: 

Plaintiff Miriam McKnight filed suit against the City of Rochester and several of its police officers asserting constitutional and state law claims arising from her arrest on July 3, 2010, following a 911 call she made about a possible stabbing in the vicinity of a neighboring house.  During the course of the police response, McKnight objected to the attempt by one of the officers to affix crime scene tape to her porch railing.  A brief altercation ensued, and thirteen seconds later, McKnight was arrested and charged with obstructing governmental administration and resisting arrest.  Following a bench trial in early 2016 on claims against two of the officers (summary judgment had been granted in favor of the City and the other officer), Judge Payson determined that no probable cause existed to arrest McKnight for obstruction of governmental administration or resisting arrest.  Officer Gregory Vasile was found liable for false arrest, false imprisonment, and battery, but not liable for excessive force.  Judgment was granted in favor of defendant Officer Michael Nicholls on the claims against him. 

McKnight v. Vasile, 2017 WL 1176051 (W.D.N.Y. 2017)
https://casetext.com/case/mcknight-v-vasile