Leibowitz v. Starbucks Corporation
| Brian Leibowitz |
| Starbucks Corporation doing business as Starbucks Coffee Company |
| 2:2023cv05992 |
| August 8, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Gary R Brown |
| James M Wicks |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 13, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
ORDER granting #7 Motion to Adjourn Conference. In light of the parties' representation that this case has settled and in light of Judge Gary R. Brown's order dismissing this case, the initial conference scheduled for September 20, 2023 is hereby CANCELLED. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks on 9/13/2023. (HM)
|
|
ORDER DISMISSING CASE: In light of the settlement in principle this case is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice to its reinstatement should the settlement not be consummated. Barring any further requests for an extension within 90 days of this order, this dismissal shall deemed with prejudice. Ordered by Judge Gary R. Brown on 9/13/2023. (KM)
|
| Filing 7 Letter MOTION to Adjourn Conference in light of amicable settlement by Starbucks Corporation. (Hanna, Joseph) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Kenneth L. Bostick, Jr on behalf of Starbucks Corporation (aty to be noticed) (Bostick, Kenneth) |
|
Filing 5
INITIAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULING ORDER: An Initial Conference via Zoom will be held September 20, 2023 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks. The Court will email the Zoom invitation closer to the conference date. All counsel must attend. Counsel are directed to complete the attached Proposed 26(f) Scheduling Order and electronically file same with the Court no later than September 13, 2023. Should the parties wish to adopt a plan for discovery different from the structure in the discovery worksheet, they may do so only if they file a letter explaining why such a plan is appropriate in this case. This conference is a public proceeding, and all are welcome to attend via telephone or via video. If you would like to receive the Zoom invitation, please contact Judge Wicks' Courtroom Deputy at (631) 712-5625. THE PARTIES ARE REMINDED that audio or video recording of proceedings by any party other than the Court is strictly prohibited by Local Civil Rule 1.8. Violation of this rule may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed appropriate by the Court. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks on 8/9/2023. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Rule 26(f) Scheduling Order, #2 JMW Individual Practice Rules) (DF)
|
| Filing 4 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. (LJ) |
| Filing 3 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (KD) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/8/2023: #1 Additional Corrections) (LJ). |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Starbucks Corporation (Hanna, Joseph) Modified on 8/8/2023 (LJ). |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Starbucks Corporation from Supreme Court - County of Nassau, case number 608380/2023. Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -Yes ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ANYEDC-16970406) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - State Court Docket, #2 Exhibit B - Demand, #3 Civil Cover Sheet) (Hanna, Joseph) Modified on 8/8/2023 (LJ). |
| Case Assigned to Judge Gary R. Brown and Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks. 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. (LJ) |
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
| Search for this case: Leibowitz v. Starbucks Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Brian Leibowitz | |
| Represented By: | Mehmet F. Gokce |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Starbucks Corporation doing business as Starbucks Coffee Company | |
| Represented By: | Joseph Maron Hanna |
| Represented By: | Kenneth L. Bostick, Jr |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
