Quintanilla et al v. Suffolk Paving Corp. et al
| 2:2009cv05331 |
| December 7, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Labor: Fair Standards Office |
| Sandra J. Feuerstein |
| William D. Wall |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 29:206 Collect Unpaid Wages |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
169
ORDER: the attached decision constitutes the Court's full written decision on Defendants' motion for summary judgment, DE 140 . SEE ATTACHED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Ordered by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 2/22/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix) (Cento, Patrick)
|
|
Filing
120
ORDER. See attached Order. Ordered by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 12/12/2012. (Sofio, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER granting 94 Motion to Amend/Correct/Supplement. Plaintiffs' motion to amend is granted to the extent set forth in this Order. A telephone conference is set for October 16, 2012. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 9/17/2012. (Sofio, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 22 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Louis Vecchia, Helene Vecchia, Suffolk Asphalt Corp., Christopher Vecchia, Suffolk Paving Corp., 34 Report and Recommendations,, 26 Motion to Amend /Correct/Supplement, filed by Alex Amir, Lerly Noe Rodriguez, Arevalo Maynor Fajardo, Javier Quintanilla, Pracelis Mendez, Nelson Quintanilla, Kevin Galeano, Walter Garcia, Jose L. Martinez, Alejandro Amaya, Osmar W. Pagoada, Jose Vega Castillo, Juan Quinteros, Marcos Tulio Perez, Carlos Escalante, Edwin Rivera. Upon review, the Court is satisfied that the Report is not facially erroneous. Accordingly, the court accepts Magistrate Judge Tomlinson's Report as an Order of the Court. For the reasons set forth therein, defendants' motion to dismiss and compel arbitration is denied and plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is granted. Plaintiffs must file their Revised Proposed Second Amended Complaint in accordance with the Report within 10 days from the date of entry of this order or they will be deemed to have waived their right to amend the amended complaint. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 3/28/2011. (Brienza, Lauren)
|
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
| Search for this case: Quintanilla et al v. Suffolk Paving Corp. et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
