Garnett-Bishop v. New York Community Bancorp, Inc. et al
| Natalie Garnett-Bishop |
| New York Community Bancorp, Inc., New York Community Bank and Roslyn Savings Bank |
| 2:2012cv02285 |
| May 9, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Central Islip Office |
| Arlene R. Lindsay |
| Arthur D. Spatt |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 621 Job Discrimination (Age) |
| Plaintiff |
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
153
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER - Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the Defendants motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 dismissing all of the Plaintiffs claims is granted, and the Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on their NYS WARN Act claims is denied. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to close the case. SEE ATTACHED DECISION for details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 3/2/2017. (Coleman, Laurie)
|
|
Filing
81
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 66 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; granting in part and denying in part 66 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying 73 Motion to Strike; It is hereby: ORDERED, that claims against the Individual Defendants are dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, that the Plaintiffs Sixth Cause of Action based on Title VII retaliation is dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, that the Plaintiffs Abbruzzes e, Golinello, Smith, and Trianos claims are dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, with respect to the Cappello Plaintiffs, that the First Cause of Action for ADEA Age Discrimination; Second Cause of Action for Title VII gender discrimination; Third Cause of Action for Title VII race discrimination; and Fourth Cause of Action for ADA discrimination are dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, with respect to the Cooper Jones Plaintiffs, that the Third Cause of Action for Title VII race discrimina tion and Fourth Cause of Action for ADA discrimination and are dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, with respect to the individual Plaintiff Cooper Jones, that the Fourth Cause of Action for ADA discrimination is dismissed with prejudice, and OR DERED, that the Plaintiff Tituss claims are dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, that the Defendants motion to strike certain documents appended to the Plaintiffs brief as exhibits is denied, and ORDERED, that the Plaintiffs Eighth Cause of Action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and Ninth Cause of Action for negligent infliction of emotional of distress are dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, with respect to the Cooper Jones Plaintiffs, that the First Cause of Action for Ag e Discrimination; Second Cause of Action for Title VII and NYSHRL gender discrimination; the Third Cause of Action for Title VII and NYSHRL race discrimination; and Fourth Cause of Action for discrimination under the ADA are dismissed with prejudice, and ORDERED, with respect to the Plaintiff Warshun, that the Fourth Cause of Action for discrimination under the ADA is dismissed with prejudice. For the purpose of clarity, the Court notes that the following claims are not dismissed at this time a nd remain viable at this point in the law suit: (i) the Plaintiffs fifth and tenth causes of action against the Corporate Defendants for violation of the state and federal WARN Acts; (ii) with respect to the Cappello Plaintiffs, the second cause of a ction against the Corporate Defendants for gender discrimination under the NYSHRL; (iii) the Plaintiff Garnett-Bisops claims against the Corporate Defendants for (a) ADEA age discrimination (First Cause of Action), (b) Title VII and NYSRHL sex discri mination (Second Cause of Action), (c) Title VII and NYSHRL race discrimination (Third Cause of Action), and (d) violation of the federal and state WARN Acts (Fifth and Tenth Causes of Action); (iv) the Plaintiff Warshuns claims against the Corpora te Defendants for (a) ADEA age discrimination (First Cause of Action), (b) Title VII and NYSHRL sex discrimination (Second Cause of Action), and (c) violation of the federal and state WARN Acts (Fifth and Tenth Causes of Action); and (v) the Plaintif f Tigers claims against the Corporate Defendants for (a) ADEA age discrimination (First Cause of Action), (b) Title VII and NYSRHL sex discrimination (Second Cause of Action), and (c) violation of the federal and state WARN Act (Fifth and Tenth Causes of Action). So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 11/6/2014. (Coleman, Laurie) Modified on 11/7/2014 as docket text was not complete. (Coleman, Laurie).
|
|
Filing
77
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER - It is hereby, ORDERED, that the Defendants Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 motion for summary judgment is denied without prejudice as premature. The Defendants may renew their motion when all discovery has been completed in this consolidated action. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 9/22/2014. (Coleman, Laurie)
|
|
Filing
43
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER - it is hereby, ORDERED, that the Defendants motion to consolidate Case Numbers 12CV2285 (the Garnett-Bishop Action); 13CV1018 (the Warshun Action); 13CV1049 (the Cappello Action); 13CV1161 (the Cooper Jones Action); and 13CV2228 (the Zielinski Action) is granted; and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court is directed to (1) consolidate the five actions set forth above under Case Number 12CV2285 and (2) close Case Numbers 13CV1018, 13CV1049, 13CV1161 and 13CV2228; and it is further ORDERED, that the consolidated action shall hereinafter be referred to as Garnett Bishop, et al. v. New York Community Bancorp, Inc., et al. and shall proceed under Case Number 12-CV2285. All filings are to be made o nly under Case Number 12CV2285; and it is further ORDERED, that the claims of the Plaintiff Diann Titus are severed from the consolidated action. The parties are directed to file a stipulation of dismissal without prejudice of Tituss claims within o ne week of the date of this Order. Further, Titus is directed, within fourteen days from the submission of the stipulation of dismissal without prejudice, to file and serve a separate complaint in a separate action asserting her own individual claim s against the appropriate defendants; and it is further ORDERED, that the Plaintiffs are directed to file a Consolidated Complaint incorporating the claims of the remaining twenty-six Plaintiffs. The Consolidated Complaint shall not assert new allega tions against the Defendants; and it is further ORDERED, that all remaining motions pending in any of the five actions, including the Defendants motions to dismiss and the Cooper Jones Plaintiffs motion seeking leave to amend their Complaint, are dismissed without prejudice and with leave to renew after the Plaintiffs file the Consolidated Complaint. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 1/8/2014. (Coleman, Laurie)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER re 20 22 23 : see attached Order for details. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Arlene R. Lindsay on 1/8/2013. c/ecf (Johnston, Linda)
|
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.
