Norton v. Town of Islip et al
| Howard Norton |
| County of Suffolk, Richard Hoffman, Joanne Huml, Carl Maltese, Vincent J. Messina, Jr., J. Timothy Shea, Jr., Richard C. Sherman, Ronald P. Stabile, Jr. and Town of Islip |
| Richard Hoffman, Joanne Huml, Carl Maltese, Vincent J. Messina, Jr., J. Timothy Shea, Jr., Richard C. Sherman, Ronald P. Stabile, Jr. and Town of Islip |
| Howard Norton |
| 1:2004cv03079 |
| October 9, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Nicholas G. Garaufis |
| William D. Wall |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
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
292
ORDER granting in part and denying in part DEs 285 , 286 Motions for Discovery. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, Norton's and the Town Defendants' motions are granted in part and denied in part. Specifica lly, Plaintiff's Motion is denied in all respects aside from the directive that the County produce the Manuals, or state in writing that they do not exist, on or before September 20, 2019. The Town Defendants' Motion is granted insofar as they are permitted to reopen Plaintiff's deposition for up to two hours, solely to question him on the contents and handling of the 65,000 pages of documents reviewed and the six items logged. This deposition must occur on or before October 4, 2019. Finally, a status conference is set for October 10, 2019 at 10:30 a.m. in courtroom 820 of the Central Islip courthouse, at which point the Court intends to either: (i) set a briefing schedule for summary judgment motions; or (ii) direct the parties to file a joint pretrial order in anticipation of trial. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 9/4/2019. (Kantor, Jesse)
|
|
Filing
279
AMENDED ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, DE 267 , and the Town Defendants' Cross-Motion to Compel, DE 268 . For the reasons set forth in the attached Amended Memorandum and Order, Norton's moti on to compel is granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, Plaintiff's motion is granted insofar as the Town Defendants are directed to provide supplemental interrogatory responses and produce witnesses for limited continued depositions. However, Norton's request for an additional on-site inspection of documents is denied. Further, on or before December 14, 2018, the Town Defendants shall produce revised privilege logs consistent with the instructions set forth herein. The failu re to adequately comply with this Order may result in waiver of the asserted privileges. Defendant County of Suffolk (the County) is directed to verify its interrogatory responses and provide supplemental responses and documents on or before December 14, 2018, and produce a witness for a limited deposition as detailed below. The Town Defendants' motion to compel is also granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff is directed to produce a privilege log on or before December 14, 2018 and re sponses to certain contention interrogatories, both as detailed herein. A status conference is set for January 10, 2019 at 10:30 a.m. in courtroom 820 of the Central Islip courthouse at which time the Court will enter an amended scheduling order cons istent with the parties' remaining discovery obligations. In light of the foregoing, the applications set forth in DEs 277 and 278 are granted, and DE 276 is hereby vacated. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 10/16/2018. (Kantor, Jesse)
|
|
Filing
276
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, DE 267 , and the Town Defendants' Cross-Motion to Compel, DE 268 . For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, Norton's motion to compel is granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, Plaintiff's motion is granted insofar as the Town Defendants are directed to provide supplemental interrogatory responses and produce witnesses for limited continued depositions. However, Norto n's request for an additional on-site inspection of documents is denied. Further, on or before November 14, 2018, the Town Defendants shall produce revised privilege logs consistent with the instructions set forth herein. The failure to adequa tely comply with this Order may result in waiver of the asserted privileges. Defendant County of Suffolk (the County) is directed to verify its interrogatory responses and provide supplemental responses and documents on or before November 14, 2018, and produce a witness for a limited deposition as detailed below. The Town Defendants' motion to compel is also granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff is directed to produce a privilege log on or before November 14, 2018 and responses to certain contention interrogatories, both as detailed herein. A status conference is set for November 28, 2018 at 11:00 A.M. in Courtroom 820 of the Central Islip courthouse at which time the Court will enter an amended scheduling order consistent with the parties remaining discovery obligations. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 9/27/2018. (Budhu, Ryan)
|
|
Filing
256
ORDER granting 248 Motion for Discovery. For the reasons set forth herein, Norton's Motion to Compel is GRANTED. On or before April 8, 2017 Defendants shall produce a privilege log for both time periods consistent with the instructions set f orth in the attached Memorandum and Order. Failure to do so may result in waiver of the asserted privileges. A status conference is set for May 8, 2017 at 10:00 A.M. in Courtroom 820 of the Central Islip courthouse. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 3/9/2017. (Cea, Christine)
|
|
Filing
221
ORDER granting 210 Motion for Discovery. For the reasons set forth in the attached order, Plaintiff's motion to compel is granted, and the Memos shall be produced on or before 9/25/15. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 9/18/2015. (Disbrow, Sandra)
|
|
Filing
160
MEMORANDUM & ORDER: Plaintiff's 155 Motion for Reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 6.3 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) is GRANTED. Insofar as the court's September and May Opinions granted the motion for summary judgment filed by the Investigative Defendants and the Town on the basis of qualified and governmental immunity under state law, those Orders are VACATED.The Investigative Defendants and the Town are GRANTED leave to file a renewed motion for summary judgmen t on the basis of qualified immunity as set forth above. The parties shall confer and submit a proposed briefing schedule to the court by January 25, 2013. In the event that the Investigative Defendants and the Town do not wish to file a renewed motion, they shall immediately inform the court so that it may set a trial date to resolve all remaining claims. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 1/7/2013. (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
|
Filing
149
MEMORANDUM & ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, the Islip Defendants' 144 motion for reconsideration of the court's 143 order denying summary judgment is DENIED. The stay of discovery is lifted and the parties are directed to contact Magistrate Judge William D. Wall to set a schedule for discovery proceedings. Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 5/7/2012. (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
|
Filing
115
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 107 Motion for Reconsideration. Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 10/7/2009. (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
|
Filing
104
MEMORANDUM & ORDER: Motion for Summary Judgment by Town of Islip and Individual Defendants 93 is granted in part and denied in part. Motion for Summary Judgment by County of Suffolk 101 is denied. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 3/27/2009. (Garaufis, Nicholas)
|
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.
