Leib-Podry v. Gates III
1:24-cv-08510
| S.D.N.Y. | Jun 30, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Philip Jove Leib-Podry, proceeding pro se, sued William Henry Gates III (Bill Gates), alleging Gates underpaid and financially harmed his mother, leading to her death.
- Plaintiff's mother, Vikki Shoshana Leib, worked as Creative Director of the Microsoft Network until 1996, then left her job and died by suicide when plaintiff was fifteen.
- Plaintiff brought claims of personal injury, quantum meruit, and facts related to wrongful death, seeking $44 billion in damages.
- Suit was filed in New York state court in September 2024; Defendant Gates removed the case to federal court and moved to dismiss.
- Gates argued claims were time-barred, Plaintiff lacked standing, and that the complaint failed to state a claim; Plaintiff moved for summary judgment, mediation, and sought to amend the complaint.
- Court applied New York statutes of limitations (and tolling provisions for infancy) to analyze timeliness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness/statute of limitations | Claims should be tolled; Plaintiff was a minor, had disabilities | Claims are all untimely under NY law | All claims are time-barred; no facts justify tolling |
| Leave to amend complaint | Should be allowed to add new claims and tolling theories | Amendment would be futile; claims still untimely | Denied as futile; new claims also time-barred |
| Standing to sue on mother's behalf | Plaintiff can bring claims related to mother's employment/death | Plaintiff lacks standing; cannot sue for mother | Court does not reach standing issue, stops at timeliness |
| Motions for summary judgment/mediation | Plaintiff seeks early resolution and mediation | Moot due to lack of viable claims | Denied as moot |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading standard for Rule 12(b)(6) motions)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (plausibility standard in civil pleadings)
- Stuart v. Am. Cyanamid Co., 158 F.3d 622 (application of NY choice-of-law and statutes of limitations)
- Dugan v. Schering Corp., 86 N.Y.2d 857 (application of New York's borrowing statute for limitations)
- Hill v. Curcione, 657 F.3d 116 (leave to amend may be denied if futile)