Castellaw et al v. Excelsior College
Debra Alexander, Karen Blanken, Cheryl Carnes, Caroline Castellaw, Joy Marie Czapski, Marla Huber, Deborah McCarver, Kacy McDonough, Wanda Pennino, Jillian Phelan, Daniel Quick, Charity Richert, Kathryn Rose, Diane Rubens, Helen Sposato, Sherry Taitz and Amanda Wilson |
Regents College |
1:2014cv01048 |
February 19, 2014 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Brooklyn Office |
Roanne L. Mann |
Jack B. Weinstein |
Contract: Recovery/Enforcement |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Fraud |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 235 ORDER: The Court adopts Judge Mann's thorough and well-reasoned 232 Report and Recommendation in substantial part. Plaintiff's motions to reopen this case and/or for relief from judgment (Dkts. 222 , 224 , 228 ) are denied. In addition , going forward, before making any submission in this case, Plaintiff is required each time to obtain permission from the Court by filing a one-page letter showing cause why the submission should be accepted. Failure to do so will result in the subm ission not being accepted, and may result in monetary sanctions. Plaintiff is also warned that continuing to file frivolous complaints or other documents may result in additional sanctions, including monetary sanctions and/or a broader filing injunction. This case remains closed. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 7/20/2021. (Nguyen, Andrew) |
Filing 221 ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; denying 203 Motion for Injunction; denying 211 Motion to Certify Right of Subrogation; denying 214 Motion for Mediation; approving 219 Report and Recommendations. Ordered by Judge Jack B. Weinstein on 10/22/2019. (Barrett, C) |
Filing 204 ORDER re 203 Letter MOTION for Injunction filed by Maketa Jolly. The Court requests that Mr. Hermina promptly communicate with Ms. Jolly to ascertain whether her request for relief is properly before this Court and whether the problem complaine d of can be readily resolved through plaintiffs' counsel's intervention. Plaintiffs' counsel shall file a status report by April 3, 2019. If the matter has not been resolved, defendant is directed to respond to Ms. Jolly's motion and to plaintiffs' counsel's submission by April 9, 2019. Ordered by Chief Mag. Judge Roanne L. Mann on 3/27/2019. (Proujansky, Josh) |
Filing 130 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. By January 21, 2015, the parties shall forthwith provide to the court: 1. The dates that Charlotte Davis and Nathan Myer were provided access to their CPNE results and the mode by which they accessed the results; 2. The date s that Charlotte Davis and Nathan Myer took the RN licensing examination or any other nursing licensing examination; 3. The dates that Charlotte Davis and Nathan Myer were provided access to the results of said examination(s); and 4. The dates that Charlotte Davis and Nathan Myer were officially licensed as registered nurses. The court will then issue a short opinion on the motion to dismiss Davis and Myer's claims as time barred. A single plaintiff will likely proceed to trial on Febr uary 23, 2015. The court was given to understand that plaintiffs Davis, Myer and Phelan do not bring claims based on "test costs", given that they passed the CPNE examination on the first attempt. See H'rg Tr., Jan. 6, 2015. The spreadsheet, docketed as ECF No. 129-1, shall be corrected to reflect this fact. The trial will only proceed with respect to the "failure to educate" claim. Ordered by Judge Jack B. Weinstein on 1/9/2015. (Barrett, C) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.