Quinonez Flores v. United States of America
Plaintiff: Alba Quinonez Flores
Defendant: United States of America
Case Number: 1:2014cv03166
Filed: May 20, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: Robert M. Levy
Presiding Judge: Jack B. Weinstein
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 4, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 104 MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying 20 Motion to Change Venue. The government has failed to satisfy its burden of demonstrating that a transfer would promote the convenience of parties and witnesses or would be in the interests of justice. Plaintiff 9;s limited means and significant medical issues would make it difficult for her to litigate this case in the Southern District of Texas. The availability of videotaped testimony or depositions in lieu of live testimony and the ease with which docu mentary evidence can be transferred eliminates any substantial burden that might be imposed on witnesses and the parties by trying this action in the Eastern District of New York. The government's motion to transfer this case to the Southern District of Texas is denied. Ordered by Judge Jack B. Weinstein on 11/4/2015. (Barrett, C)
June 12, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 63 MEMORANDUM & ORDER. Defendant's 20 motion to transfer for reason of lack of proper venue is denied. Decision on defendant's 20 motion for discretionary transfer to the Southern District of Texas, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), is stayed for three months. An evidentiary hearing on the motion will be held on September 16, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 10B South. The plaintiff shall be present in person. Evidence may be submitted. All supplemental briefing shall be docke ted by September 9, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. Courtesy copies shall be promptly provided to the court. The magistrate judge is respectfully requested to expedite completion of discovery and to prepare the case for trial. By consent, the magistrate judge i s authorized to hold Daubert hearings. By September 6, 2015, plaintiff will supply the court and defendants with an up-to-date medical report outlining her ability to travel to Texas. The magistrate judge is respectfully requested to engage the parties in settlement discussions. Plaintiff's 18 motion to strike affirmative defenses is stayed until defendant's 20 motion for a discretionary transfer is decided. (Evidentiary Hearing as to 20 MOTION to Change Venue [discretionary] set for 9/16/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 10B South before Judge Jack B. Weinstein.) Ordered by Judge Jack B. Weinstein on 6/11/2015. (Barrett, C)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Quinonez Flores v. United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Alba Quinonez Flores
Represented By: David Kwang Soo Kim
Represented By: Ira J. Kurzban
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?