Mirabel v. The City of New York et al
| Sunray Mirabel |
| JOHN AND JANE 1-10 DOE, The City of New York and John and Jane Doe 1-10 |
| 1:2018cv06597 |
| November 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Carol Bagley Amon |
| Ramon E Reyes |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 10, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
ORDER re #6 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. The application is granted as to the City of New York only. The City of New York defendants must answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint by March 10, 2019. In light of the extensive delay occasioned by the latter ruling, I impose certain additional obligations on both parties that will avoid needlessly delaying the proceedings even further: (a) no later than January 17, 2019, the City's counsel must provide to the plaintiff for execution a release pursuant to N.Y.C.P.L. Sec. 160.50 with respect to the arrest at issue in the litigation, as well as a release authorizing the disclosure of relevant medical records if the plaintiff is seeking damages for any physical or mental injury; (b) no later than January 24, 2019, the plaintiff must execute any such release and (c) no later than March 12, 2019 the City's counsel must provide to the plaintiff the names, shield numbers, and proper service addresses of all individual officers involved in the arrest at issue in this litigation. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Ramon E. Reyes, Jr on 1/10/2019. (Vertus, Miriam)
|
| Filing 6 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint, by The City of New York. (Nunez-Figueroa, Bridgette) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Bridgette Marie Nunez-Figueroa on behalf of The City of New York (aty to be noticed) (Nunez-Figueroa, Bridgette) |
| Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 3 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to The City of New York. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Case assigned to Judge Carol Bagley Amon and Magistrate Judge Ramon E. Reyes, Jr. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filing fee $ 400, receipt number BNYEDC-10951172 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -no,, filed by Sunray Mirabel. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons) (Marinelli, Robert) |
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 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.
