(This story is part of an ongoing series on TiE New York by Darmin Bachu, a community activist with expertise in nonprofit governance and entrepreneurship.)
By Darmin Bachu
TiE New York has formally responded in court to the lawsuit brought by charter member Kesav Dama, arguing that the case reflects an internal dispute rather than actionable misconduct and urging the court to allow the organization’s governance activities to proceed uninterrupted.
The response, filed as an opposition to an Order to Show Cause, marks the first detailed public articulation of TiE New York’s position since the litigation became public — after multiple board members, including former president Jignesh Patel and secretary Vaibhav Parikh, declined to comment for prior reporting.
At the center of the latest development is the court’s interim ruling lifting a previously issued temporary restraining order that had briefly restricted certain TiE New York governance actions.
Justice Karina E. Alomar of Queens County Supreme Court declined to extend the TRO after reviewing the parties’ submissions, allowing TiE New York to resume routine operations while the broader lawsuit continues. The ruling does not dismiss the case or resolve the merits of the allegations, but it signals that the court was not prepared—at this preliminary stage—to impose emergency restraints on the organization’s leadership.
Legal analysts note that lifting a TRO is procedurally significant but not dispositive. “It reflects the judge’s assessment that immediate irreparable harm was not sufficiently established for interim relief,” said one nonprofit litigation attorney familiar with similar cases. “It does not mean the underlying claims lack substance.”
TiE NY’s argument
In its opposition papers, TiE New York and the individual defendants characterize the lawsuit as an attempt to judicialize an internal governance disagreement. The filing argues that:
- The board followed established procedures in addressing complaints;
- An internal subcommittee was formed to review the allegations;
- No emergency circumstances justified court-imposed restraints on elections, finances, or leadership decisions; and
- The plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable harm warranting extraordinary relief.
DefendantsOppositionToShowCause
The defendants further contend that granting the requested relief would improperly interfere with the autonomy of a New York not-for-profit corporation and set a precedent for courts to manage internal disputes better handled through organizational processes.
As part of TiE New York’s response, former president Jignesh Patel submitted a sworn affidavit denying allegations of threats, intimidation, or abuse of authority. Patel asserts that communications cited in the complaint were taken out of context and that his actions were consistent with his duties as an officer of the organization.
The affidavit also challenges the plaintiff’s credibility and motivations, framing the dispute as a reaction to disagreements over governance and decision-making rather than misconduct.
TiE New York’s filings rely heavily on a report prepared by a board-appointed subcommittee, which concluded that the complaints did not warrant disciplinary action against Patel. The report describes interviews, document review, and deliberations undertaken by select board members tasked with evaluating the allegations.
Critics, however, have questioned the independence of the subcommittee, noting that its members were drawn from the same board accused in the lawsuit of failing to act. Those concerns are likely to feature prominently as the litigation proceeds.
Despite filing extensive court papers, TiE New York leadership has not offered on-the-record comment to the press. Patel, Parikh, and other board members again declined to respond to questions for this follow-up article, referring inquiries to court filings or offering no response at all.
The absence of public explanation has drawn criticism from some members, who argue that transparency is particularly important for a nonprofit organization that positions itself as a steward of ethical leadership and entrepreneurship.
What the ruling does — and does not — resolve
The lifting of the TRO allows TiE New York to continue operations, including governance and administrative functions, while the case advances through motion practice and potential discovery. It does not resolve:
- Whether fiduciary duties were breached;
- Whether the board acted in good faith in responding to complaints;
- Whether internal processes were adequate or conflicted; or
- Whether damages or injunctive relief may ultimately be warranted.
Those questions remain before the court.
With emergency relief denied but the lawsuit intact, the case now enters a more conventional litigation phase. Observers expect motions to dismiss, possible document discovery, and further judicial scrutiny of board conduct.
For TiE New York, the immediate operational threat may have eased, but the reputational and legal challenges persist. As one nonprofit governance expert noted, “A lifted TRO buys time—but it doesn’t end the conversation. In many ways, it just begins the real examination.”
Chronological litigation & governance timeline
Early October 2025
– Formal complaint submitted alleging misconduct by TiE NY President Jignesh Patel
– Supplemental letters demand immediate suspension and warn of fiduciary liability
October 14-16, 2025
– Secretary Vaibhav Parikh issues Notice to Provide Evidence with a two-business-day deadline
Within Two Business Days
– Complainant’s counsel responds, challenges scope, reiterates suspension demand
Late October 2025
– Board subcommittee completes internal review, recommends no discipline
November 14, 2025
– Lawsuit filed in Queens County Supreme Court against TiE NY and 12 individual defendants
Late November / Early December 2025
– 10 of 12 defendants served at TiE NY Gala
December 18, 2025
– Initial Order to Show Cause hearing scheduled
December 22, 2025
– Hearing adjourned at the request of Jignesh Patel
Late December 2025
– Court lifts Temporary Restraining Order
– TiE NY files opposition papers and affidavits
– Leadership declines public comment
Here are previous articles in this series:
Lawsuit against TiE New York filed weeks before gala, with most defendants served during event (December 28, 2025)
Backdated demands, witness conflicts, and escalating legal stakes: New documents intensify scrutiny of TiE New York leadership (December 27, 2025)
New documents raise fresh questions about TiE New York leadership and board oversight (December 25, 2025)