Onyango v. The City of New York et al
| City of New York, Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta, Detective Philip Longo and Brian Onyango |
| The City of New York and John Doe ##1-3 |
| 1:2023cv09049 |
| December 8, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| LaShann DeArcy Hall |
| Peggy Kuo |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 NOTICE of Appearance by Amy Robinson on behalf of Detective Philip Longo, Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta, The City of New York (aty to be noticed) (Robinson, Amy) |
ORDER: The Court defers ruling on the #16 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer until counsel files a notice of appearance on behalf of defendants Longo and Lunetta, even if it is only for limited scope representation. Any notice of appearance must be filed no later than February 7, 2024. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 2/5/2024. (RO)
|
|
ORDER granting #16 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. The deadline for defendants Detective Philip Longo and Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is extended nunc pro tunc to March 11, 2024. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 2/5/2024. (RO)
|
| Filing 16 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by The City of New York. (Robinson, Amy) |
|
ORDER: The Court construes the filing at #15 to be a motion for reconsideration of its January 22, 2024 Order. Counsel for Defendant City of New York has provided additional information, stating that, because service was effectuated on December 19, 2023 (see #10 ) during a time when many of her "colleagues were out of the office. As a result there was an inadvertent delay in assigning this case to an attorney." (see #15 at paragraph 2.) The Law Department, which represents the City of New York, is a governmental division with multiple employees and an obligation to do its work diligently, even during the holiday season. However, given that the delay in answering here was of a relatively short period of time, I grant the City's request for more time to answer or otherwise respond and extend its deadline by sixty days from its original due date to March 11, 2024.The Court is in receipt of the request for a sua sponte extension of time for defendants Longo and Lunetta to answer. A "sua sponte" action is one taken by the court "[w]ithout prompting or suggestion" or "on its own motion." Sua Sponte, Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019). Accordingly, a motion that asks the Court to extend the time for a non-appearing party to answer based on the "prompting or suggestion" of the Corporation Counsel is not actually a motion that seeks a "sua sponte " extension. Accordingly, the request for extension of time for defendants Longo and Lunetta to answer or otherwise respond is denied. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 1/29/2024. (RO)
|
| Filing 15 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by The City of New York. (Robinson, Amy) |
|
ORDER: The #14 Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer is denied. The docket reflects that service was effectuated on Defendant City of New York on December 19, 2023 (see #10 ). In support of the motion, counsel for Defendant City of New York states only that she was "first assigned to handle this case on January 17, 2024." She does not explain why no other attorney or representative of the defendant timely appeared either to answer or request more time to answer. Accordingly, I do not find that good cause exists for granting an extension of time to file an answer. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 1/22/2024. (RO)
|
| Filing 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by The City of New York. (Robinson, Amy) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Amy Robinson on behalf of The City of New York (aty to be noticed) (Robinson, Amy) |
| Filing 12 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Brian Onyango. Detective Philip Longo served on 12/20/2023, answer due 1/10/2024. (Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 11 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Brian Onyango. Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta served on 12/20/2023, answer due 1/10/2024. (Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 10 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Brian Onyango. The City of New York served on 12/19/2023, answer due 1/9/2024. (Stoll, Andrew) |
|
Filing 9
SCHEDULING ORDER: An Initial Conference will be held in this case on April 2, 2024 at 10:30 a.m. before Peggy Kuo, United States Magistrate Judge in Courtroom 11C South of the United States Courthouse, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York. Counsel are directed to the annexed Initial Conference Order for instructions. By March 27, 2024, the parties must file a joint and completed copy of the Proposed Discovery Plan, a PDF version of which may be found at: # https://img.nyed.uscourts.gov/files/forms/PK-discovplan.pdf Any request for adjournment of this or any other conference must be made in writing on notice to opposing parties, and must disclose whether or not all parties consent. No request for adjournment will be considered unless made at least two (2) business days before the scheduled conference, except in the event of an emergency. Counsel with knowledge and authority must be present. Per diem counsel may not appear without prior permission of the Court. Plaintiff's counsel is directed to ensure that Defendants are aware of this conference. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 12/15/2023. (RO)
|
| Filing 8 Summons Issued as to Detective Philip Longo, Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta, The City of New York. (Attachments: #1 Detective Philip Longo, #2 Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta) (AF) |
| Filing 7 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (AF) |
| Filing 6 Clerk's Notice Re: Consent. A United States Magistrate Judge has been assigned to this case and is available to conduct all proceedings. In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent, the assigned Magistrate Judge is available to conduct all proceedings in this action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to this 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. Any party may withhold its consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent.The form may also be accessed at the following link: #https://img.nyed.uscourts.gov/files/forms/MJConsentForm.pdf (AF) |
| Case Assigned to Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall and Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo. 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. (AF) |
| Filing 5 Proposed Summons. by Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta (Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 4 Proposed Summons. by Brian Onyango (Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 3 Proposed Summons. by Brian Onyango (Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet.. by Brian Onyango (Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against City of New York, Detective Philip Longo, Police Officer Michael R. Lunetta filing fee $ 405, receipt number ANYEDC-17362013 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -YES,, filed by Brian Onyango. (Stoll, Andrew) |
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.
