Coale v. Metro-North RR Co
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|March 12, 2014
ORDER (see attached) - Under the evidentiary record and controlling law, the Court, while it is sympathetic to Plaintiff's claims, GRANTS 56 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment in all respects. The Clerk is directed to close the case. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on 3/12/14. (Hornstein, A)
|January 7, 2014
ORDER (see attached) - While much of the parties' briefing concerns whether Defendant "perceived Mr. Coale as disabled within the meaning of the ADA," see 69 at 2, implicating the possible applicability of prong (C) of 42 U.S.C. 7; 12102(2) (2008) to the facts alleged in the case at bar, the briefs do not address at any length the applicability of prong (B) under the same statute. The Court therefore raises the question of this prong's applicability sua sponte. In con sequence, the Court directs the parties to address the applicability, if any, of 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(B) (2008) to this action. Counsel should include in their discussion the applicability and effect, if any, of the Second Circuit's holdin g in Horwitz v. L. &. J.G. Stickley, Inc., 20 Fed. Appx. 76, 2001 WL 1220511 (2d Cir. 2001). Supplemental briefs discussing these issues must be exchanged and filed simultaneously not later than Friday, February 7, 2014. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on 1/7/14.(Hornstein, A)
|May 16, 2011
RULING granting Plaintiff's 25 Motion to Compel filed on February 21, 2011. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on May 16, 2011. (Wilson, D.)
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 Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?