Bethpage Water District v. Northrop Grumman Corporation et al
| Bethpage Water District |
| Northrop Grumman Corporation and Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation |
| 2:2013cv06362 |
| November 18, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Central Islip Office |
| Sandra J. Feuerstein |
| William D. Wall |
| Torts to Land |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1391 Personal Injury |
| 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
112
ORDER granting 107 Motion for Entry of Judgment under Rule 54(b). SO ORDERED that the motion is granted to the extent that the defts shall submit a proposed judgment consistent with this Order. The proposed judgment shall be electronically filed by July 8, 2016 and should be filed as an attachment to a letter indicating whether plaintiff has consented to the proposed judgment submitted. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 6/29/2016. (Florio, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
101
ORDER: SO ORDERED that upon de novo review of the Report, and upon careful consideration of the parties Objections and Responses, Plaintiffs Objections are overruled, and the Report is accepted in its entirety as an Order of the Court. Defts Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is granted. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 3/31/2016. (Florio, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER: SO ORDERED that Plaintiffs 66 Motion to Amend is granted. Plaintiff is directed to serve and file the SAC on or before March 20, 2015. Defts pending 43 motion for summary judgment is denied without prejudice to renewal after Plaintiff has filed the SAC. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 2/27/2015. (Florio, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER re 53 Motion to Stay Discovery Pending a Decision on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. SO ORDERED that defts' Motion for a Stay of Discovery is granted in part, and defts' Motion to Dismiss is converted to a motion for summary judgment. It is hereby ordered that all expert discovery is stayed pending resolution of the motion for summary judgment, and all fact discovery is stayed pending resolution of the motion for summary judgment, with the exception o f fact discovery related to the statute of limitations, including the issue of when plaintiff discovered, or should have discovered, the purported injury and/or the cause of the purported injury underlying its claims. Limited discovery on that issue is to be completed on or before February 6, 2015. Following completion of this limited discovery, the parties may supplement their motion papers with all material pertinent to the statute of limitations issue. See Sahu v. Union Carbide Corp., 548 F.3 d 59,67 (2d Cir. 2008) ("When a district court converts a motion to dismiss into one for summary judgment, '[a]ll parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to present all material that is pertinent to the motion."' (citing Fe d. R. Civ. P. 12(d)). Defts shall file any supplemental briefing to their motion for summary judgment, along with their Rule 56.1 statement, by March 6, 2015. Plaintiff shall file any supplemental opposition on the summary judgment motion, and its Rule 56.1 statement, by March 20,2015. Defts shall submit their reply by March 27, 2015. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 12/3/2014. (Florio, Lisa)
|
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.
