Doran et al v. The State Of New York et al
| Robert Doran, Maria Baez, Alexander Shaporov and Bernard Linn |
| The State Of New York, James C. Cox, Dan Coyne, Anna Coschignano, Sherri Tompkins, Robert Byrnes, Russell S Rizzo, Mathew Chiesa, Christopher Bedell and John and Jane Does 1-5 |
| 1:2015cv07217 |
| September 11, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| P. Kevin Castel |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Both |
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
319
AMENDMENT TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, GENERAL RELEASE, AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHPREJUDICE: NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, representations and other consideration contained in the Settlement Agreement and in this Ame ndment, Plaintiffs and OMIG hereby stipulate and agree as follows: In full and complete satisfaction of any and all claims for lost wages, benefits, and economic damages, including but not limited to prejudgment interest, back pay, front pay, severan ce pay commissions, bonuses, reimbursements, pension plan contributions, and any non-vested retirement, pension, health or savings plan benefits, incurred by Plaintiff Linn that were or could have been the subject of any claim in the Action, OMIG sha ll pay: Bernard Linn the gross sum of TWENTY-NINE THOUSAND AND SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY-THREE DOLLARS AND FORTY CENTS ($29,663.40) less all appliable withholding and/or payroll deductions, including but not limited to federal, state, and local taxe s, for which an I.R.S. Form W-2 shall be issued to Bernard Linn. Bernard Linn the gross sum of FIVE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY-THREE DOLLARS AND SIXTY CENTS ($5,553.60) for which an I.R.S. Form 1099 shall be issued to Bernard Linn in this amount. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 7/21/2022) (ama)
|
|
Filing
316
ORDER: granting 314 Letter Motion to Seal. Application GRANTED provided a redacted version is filed within five days. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 3/30/2022) (ama)
|
|
Filing
306
ORDER OF DISMISSAL: The Court having presided over the December 21, 2021 mediation in which the parties advised that all claims asserted herein have been settled in principle subject to certain approvals, it is ORDERED that the above-entitle d action be and is hereby dismissed and discontinued without costs, and without prejudice to the right to reopen the action within sixty days of the date of this Order if the settlement is not consummated. To be clear, any application to reo pen must be filed within sixty days of this Order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. All conferences are vacated. The Clerk of Court is directed to administratively terminate any pending motions and close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 1/5/2022) (va)
|
|
Filing
303
ORDER: This action asserts claims as to denial of promotions to six positions over seven years, as well as other alleged discriminatory and retaliatory acts relating to the four plaintiffs. The notion that defendants counsel can safely and comfort ably predict (as he did in his letter of October 18, 2021) that this case is appropriate for resolution on a motion for summary judgment and will have not a single genuine issue of material fact after production of 25,000 documents and 15 depos itions suggests either that at least some of the depositions noticed by defendants are unnecessary or the prediction is without a basis in fact or law. The Court's denial of the stay of expert discovery is without prejudice to renewal of th e application after the parties get a better handle on this case, now over six years old. From the reference to the other unrelated matters that are occupying the time of both plaintiffs' counsel and defendants' counsel, this ancient case is not a priority to either side. Both sides should stop wasting time and money and settle the matter. Or is one side or the other's strategy to keep the case alive until all plaintiffsor perhaps all defendants-retire? The matter has been to mediation numerous times since 2017 with the last trip to a mediation over a year ago. All plaintiffs, all individual defendants and Acting Medicaid Inspector General Frank T. Walsh, Jr. shall personally appear before the undersigned for an all-day mediation in Courtroom 11D of 500 Pearl Street at 11 a.m. on December 21, 2021. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 11/5/2021) (js)
|
|
Filing
298
CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER: granting 297 Letter Motion for Discovery. This Civil Case Management Plan (the "Plan") is submitted by the parties in accordance with Rule 26(f)(3, Fed. R. Civ. P. All parties do not conse nt to conducting all further proceedings before a Magistrate Judge,including motions and trial. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). This case is to be tried to a jury. All fact discovery shall be completed no later than December 13, 2021. All expert discovery s hall be completed no later than 1/27/2022. Counsel for the parties have conferred and their present best estimate of the length of trial is: 10 days for consolidated trial. The next Case Management Conference is scheduled for January 5, 2022 at 11:30 a.m. And as set forth herein. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 7/23/2021) (ama)
|
|
Filing
296
ORDER denying without prejudice to renewal by formal motion 267 Motion in Limine; denying without prejudice to renewal by formal motion; 270 MOTION Attorney Conducted Voir Dire. Plaintiffs motion in limine (Doc 267) and motion for attorne y conduct voir dire (Doc 270) are DENIED without prejudice to renewal in the context of the final pre-trial conference in the consolidated case. The Clerk is directed to terminate the motions. (Docs 267 and 270). The next conference in this matter will be held on October 13, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 11D. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 6/22/2021) (va)
|
|
Filing
292
OPINION AND ORDER: re: 282 MOTION to Dismiss the Third Amended and Consolidated Complaint (Partial Motion) filed by Anna Coschignano, New York State Department of Health Office of the Medicaid Inspector General, Dan Coyne, Christopher Mulhall, Sean Mahoney, Russell S Rizzo, Robert Byrnes, Erin Ives, Gabrielle Ares, Edward J. Meyer, Dennis Rosen, Edward Michael Dressler. The following claims against the Moving Defendants in their individual capacities survive defendants' motion t o dismiss: Baez's claims for retaliation under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL against Byrnes, Mahoney and Dressler based on her receiving negative performance evaluations; and Doran and Linn's claims for retaliation under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL against Mulhall based on the Manager of Medicaid Investigations position. All of Plaintiffs' other Doran II retaliation claims under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL against Dressler, Byrnes, Mahoney and Mulhall are dismissed. All of Plaintiffs' Doran II retaliation claims under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL against Meyer are dismissed. Plaintiffs' retaliation claims under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL based on the 18 0-Day Policy are dismissed. Plaintiffs retaliation claims under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL based on the 2019 Management Specialist 3 Position survive as asserted against individual defendants other than the MovingDefendants. The defend ants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Clerk is directed to terminate the motion (Doc 282). SO ORDERED., Sean Mahoney, Edward J. Meyer, Christopher Mulhall, Robert Byrnes and Edward Michael Dressler terminated. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 4/26/2021) (ama)
|
|
Filing
266
MEMO ENDORSEMENT on: 264 ORDER withdrawing 251 Motion. ENDORSEMENT: The Order of September 15, 2020 (Doc 264) is deemed amended to include plaintiff's motion for attorney conducted voir dire (Doc. 251) which is similarly withdrawn without prejudice. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 10/27/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
264
ORDER withdrawing 224 Motion in Limine; withdrawing 226 Motion in Limine; withdrawing 228 Motion in Limine; withdrawing 231 Motion in Limine: On September 9, 2020, the parties advised the Court that mediation in these matters was schedule d for September 10, 2020. In order for the mediation process to function without impediment, the Court deems the pending motions in limine withdrawn without prejudice. These motions in limine may be refiled by notice of motion and with no further briefing required. The Clerk is directed to close the motions in limine. (Docs. 224, 226, 228, 231). (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 9/15/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
261
ORDER: In light of the parties' stated intention to return to mediation, (Doc. 260), the Final Pretrial Conference in this action and the Initial Pretrial Conference in the related action, No. 20-cv-3754, scheduled for August 19, 2020 are adjourned indefinitely. Within 30 days of this Order, the parties shall update the Court on the status of the mediation. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 8/12/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
256
ORDER: The Final Pretrial Conference in this action and the Initial Pretrial Conference in the related action, No. 20-cv-3754, are adjourned from July 22, 2020 to August 4, 2020 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 11D. To facilitate access to the Courthouse o n the day of the conference, follow the instructions attached to this Order. (Final Pretrial Conference set for 8/4/2020 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 11D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge P. Kevin Castel.) (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 7/16/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
254
ORDER. The Final Pretrial Conference in this action and the Initial Pretrial Conference in the related action, No. 20-cv-3754, will proceed as scheduled at 2:00 p.m. on July 22, 2020 in Courtroom 26B. To facilitate access to the Courthouse on the day of the hearing, follow the instructions attached to this Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 7/14/2020) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
246
ORDER: The final pretrial conference originally scheduled for April 17, 2020 is adjourned to May 21, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 11D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. (Final Pretrial Conference set for 5/21/2020 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 11D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge P. Kevin Castel.) (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 3/26/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
245
ORDER granting 244 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference: Final pretrial conference is adjourned from March 20, 2020 to April 17, 2020 at 12:00 p.m. 9Final Pretrial Conference set for 4/17/2020 at 12:00 PM before Judge P. Kevin Castel.) (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 3/13/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
216
ORDER granting 215 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. The Court crafted a schedule for Final Pre-Trial Schedule in an Order of October 21, 2019. (Doc. 205). It was a generous schedule ending in a Final Pre-Trial Conference on March 20 , 2020. 2. Plaintiffs "with the consent of Defendants" sought an extension on January 27, 2020, (Doc. 206), which the Court granted on February 5, 2020. (Doc. 209). 3. Plaintiffs sought by letter of January 29, 2020, (Doc. 207), a further extension, which the Court granted on January 30, 2020. (Doc. 208). 4. Instead of writing a simple letter that read, "After the Court, on January 30, granted the extension requested by the parties in the January 29 letter, the Court, we beli eve, inadvertently adopted the schedule in the earlier, now superseded, letter of January 27, 2020. We asked that you vacate the February 5 Order adopting the old, outdated proposed schedule of January 27, 2020, making it clear that the schedule the Court adopted on January 30 controls. Thank you," the Court received a verbose and confusing letter from defendants' counsel seeking to have the Court "clarify" its Orders, which reads as follows: The Court hereby adopts th e proposed schedule in the letter of February 11, 2020. (Doc. 215). The schedule in the February 11 Letter, now adopted as an Order of the Court, supersedes all prior schedules, which in plain English means that the prior schedules are no longer in effect. If this issue requires a further explanation by the parties, they may come to Courtroom 11D tomorrow, where the Court is trying a criminal case (one in which a person's liberty is at stake), and the Court will stop the trial to meet with the parties at sidebar. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 2/11/2020) (rj) Modified on 2/12/2020 (rj).
|
|
Filing
214
ORDER terminating 210 Letter Motion to Stay: The Court' Order of January 30, 2020 (Doc 207 is VACATED. The Court's Order of February 5, 2020 (DE 209) set forth the schedule. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 2/7/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
208
ORDER terminating 206 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File ; granting 207 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File: Revised schedule approved. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 1/29/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
202
OPINION AND ORDER re: 160 FIRST MOTION for Summary Judgment dismissing the Second Amended Complaint: For the aforementioned reasons, defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 160) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The follo wing claims survive: Doran and Linn's age discrimination claims under the NYSHRL and NYCHRL against Coschignano related to Bedell's promotion to the June 2013 MI-3 position; Doran, Baez, and Linn's retaliation claims under section 1983 , NYSHRL, and NYCHRL against Coschignano, Byrnes, and Coyne; Shaporov's hostile work environment claim under the NYCHRL against Rizzo; and Doran's (unchallenged) ADEA claim for injunctive relief against Rosen. All other claims have been dismissed either at the motion to dismiss stage or in this Opinion. The Clerk is directed to terminate defendants' motion. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 9/27/2019) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
152
OPINION AND ORDER re: 139 MOTION for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint filed by Bernard Linn, Alexander Shaporov, Maria Baez, Robert Doran: Plaintiffs have not demonstrated good cause to modify the time limit for amending the pleadings se t forth in the Order of June 22, 2017. Their motion (Doc 139) for leave to file the proposed Third Amended Complaint is DENIED. If, alternatively, the motion is construed as one for leave to file a supplemental pleading under Rule 15(d), Fed. R. Civ. P., it is DENIED because (1) the plaintiffs' proposed Third Amended Complaint goes well beyond setting forth events occurring after the date of their prior pleading; and (2) the Court finds undue delay by plaintiffs and undue prejudice to defendants. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 10/18/2018) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
92
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 73 Motion to Dismiss. Experience has shown that a complaint may be sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss, but, after discovery, the facts may look quite differently on a motion for summary judgment or at trial. The following claims for legal relief against the individual defendants in their individual capacities survive defendants' motion to dismiss: all plaintiffs' claims for discrimination by disparate treatment b ased on race and national origin under section 1983 against Coschignano, Coyne, Cox, Chiesa, Rizzo, Tompkins, and Byrnes; all plaintiffs' claims for discrimination by disparate treatment based on race and sex under the NYCHRL against Coschign ano, Coyne, Cox, Chiesa, Tompkins, and Byrnes; Doran's and Linn's claims for discrimination by disparate treatment based on age under the NYCHRL against Coschignano, Coyne, Cox, Chiesa, Tompkins, and Byrnes; Doran's and Linn's claims for discrimination by disparate treatment based on age under the NYSHRL against Coschignano, Coyne, Cox, Chiesa, Rizzo, Tompkins, and Byrnes; all plaintiffs' claims for discrimination by disparate treatment based on race and sex under the NYSHRL against Coschignano, Coyne, Cox, Chiesa, Rizzo, Tompkins, and Byrnes; all plaintiffs' claims for retaliation under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL against Coschignano, Coyne, Cox, Chiesa, Rizzo, Tompkins, and Byrnes; and S haporov's claims for hostile work environment under section 1983, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL against Coschignano and Rizzo. Plaintiffs' claims for equitable relief survive against Rosen, Coyne, Chiesa, Rizzo, Tompkins, and Byrnes. All ot her claims are dismissed. The defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Clerk is directed to terminate the motion (Dkt. No. 73). (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 3/2/2017) (cf)
|
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 Southern 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.
