Ropel et al v. The Bank of New York Company, Inc. et al
Case Number: 1:2006cv01520
Filed: February 24, 2006
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge: Alvin K. Hellerstein
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 49 U.S.C. ยง 40101 Air Trans. Safety and Sys. Stabilization Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 15, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 380 ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF EXPERT WITNESSES AND TO SERVE AMENDED EXPERT DISCLOSURES PURSUANT TO FRCP 26(a)(2)(C) re: (392 in 1:06-cv-01521-AKH, 5549 in 1:21-mc-00102-AKH, 358 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH, 280 in 1:07-cv-11291-AKH, 349 in 1:06-cv-05285-AKH) MOTION to Compel physicians designated as expert witnesses to Appear for deposition and other relief as the court provides filed by Various plaintiffs represented by Cannata/Grocho w: For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' motion is DENIED. The Clerk shall mark the following motions as terminated: Doc. No. 5549 in 21 MC 102, Doc. No. 294 in 09 Civ. 680, Doc. No. 349 in 06 Civ. 5285, Doc. No. 392 in 06 Civ. 1521, Doc. No. 280 in 07 Civ. 11291, Doc. No. 358 in 06 Civ. 1520. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 1/15/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:21-mc-00102-AKH, 1:06-cv-01520-AKH, 1:06-cv-01521-AKH, 1:06-cv-05285-AKH, 1:07-cv-11291-AKH, 1:09-cv-00680-AKH. (tn)
December 8, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 365 ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING BATTERY PARK CITY AUTHORITY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING COMPLAINTS re: (124 in 1:07-cv-00060-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Battery Park City Authority, (187 in 1:07-cv-01588-AK H) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Crown 61 Associates, LLP, Crown 61 Corp., Crown Broadway, LLC., Crown Propoerties, Inc, (190 in 1:07-cv-04459-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Battery Park City Auth ority, (5355 in 1:21-mc-00102-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Battery Park City Authority, (157 in 1:07-cv-01588-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Battery Park City Authority, (138 in 1:07-cv-05283-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Battery Park City Authority, (178 in 1:06-cv-05285-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Battery Park City Authority, (221 in 1:06-cv-01521-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment < i> filed by Battery Park City Authority: For the foregoing reasons, BPCA's motion is GRANTED. The Clerk shall mark the following docket entries as terminated: Doc. No. 124 in Case No. 07-cv-00060, Doc. 190 in Case No. 07-cv-04459, Doc. No. 157 in Case No. 07-cv-01588, Doc. No. 138 in Case No. 07-cv-05283, Doc. No. 221 in Case No. 06-cv-O 1521, Doc. No. 178 in Case No. 06-cv-05285, Doc. No. 187 in Case No. 06-cv-01520, Doc. No. 102 in Case No. 09-cv-00680, and Doc. No. 5355 in m aster calendar 21-mc-102. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the Complaint against BPCA in the following cases: Case No. 07-cv-00060, Case No. 07-cv-04459, Case No. 07-cv-01588, Case No. 07-cv-05283, Case No. 06-cv-01521, Case No. 06-cv-05285, Case No. 06-cv-01520, and Case No. 09-cv-00680. Plaintiffs shall file an Amended Complaint by December 29, 2014, consistent with this Order and Opinion, dropping BPCA from the caption and the allegations against it, but retaining the paragraph numbering of the existing complaint. Defendants' Answers need not be amended. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 12/8/2014) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:21-mc-00102-AKH et al.(tn)
November 13, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 357 ORDER AND OPINION DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT #104964. In summary, for the foregoing reasons, the motion filed by Hudson View East and RY is GRANTED in its entirety with respect to both Ropel's section 200 and section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 250 South End Avenue. The motion filed by 88 Greenwich and Black Diamonds is DENIED with respect to Ropel's section 200 claim arising from his work at 88 Greenwich Street. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Ropel' s section 241(6) claim arising from his work at 88 Greenwich Street. The motion filed by General Re is GRANTED in its entirety with respect Ropel' s section 200 and section 241 (6) claims arising from his work at 1 Liberty Plaza. The motion filed by NASD is GRANTED in its entirety with respect to Ropel's section 200 and section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 1 Liberty Plaza. The motion filed by Hillmann is DENI ED with respect to Ropel' s section 200 claims arising from his work at 1 Liberty Plaza and 2 World Financial Center. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Ropel's section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 1 Liberty Plaza. The motion i s GRANTED with respect to his section 241(6) claims, arising from his work at 2 World Financial Center, alleging violations of Industrial Code Rules 23-2.1(b) and 23-1.7(g), and DENIED with respect to his section 241(6) claims alleging violations of Industrial Code Rules 23-1.5(c)(3), 23-1.7(h), 23-1.8(c)(4), and 23-1.8(b)(1). The motion filed by BMS is GRANTED in its entirety with respect to Ropel's section 200 and section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 1 Liberty Plaza and 2 World Financial Center. The motion filed by Weston is DENIED with respect to Ropel's section 200 claims arising from his work at 2 World Financial Center. The motion is GRANTED with respect to his section 241(6) claims, arising from his work at 2 Worl d Financial Center, alleging violations of Industrial Code Rules 23-2.1(b) and 23-1.7(g), and DENIED with respect to his section 241(6) claims alleging violations of Industrial Code Rules 23-1.5(c)(3), 23-1.7(h), 23-1.8(c)(4), and 23-1.8(b)(1). The m otion filed by Merrill Lynch is DENIED with respect to Ropel's section 200 claims arising from his work at 2 World Financial Center. The motion is GRANTED with respect to his section 241(6) claims, arising from his work at 2 World Financial Cent er, alleging violations of Industrial Code Rules 23-2.1(b) and 23-1.7(g), and DENIED with respect to his section 241(6) claims alleging violations of Industrial Code Rules 23-1.5(c)(3), 23-1.7(h), 23-1.8(c)(4), and 23-1.8(b)(1). The motion filed by M oody's is DENIED with respect to Ropel's section 200 claims arising from his work at 99 Church Street. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Ropel's section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 99 Church Street. The motion filed by B rookfield is DENIED with respect to Ropel's section 200 claims arising from his work at 1 Liberty Plaza. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Ropel's section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 1 Liberty Plaza. The motion filed by BNY M ellon is DENIED with respect to Ropel' s section 200 claims arising from his work at 101 Barclay Street and 1 Wall Street. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Ropel's section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 101 Barclay Street and 1 Wall Street. The motion filed by JET is GRANTED in its entirety with respect to Ropel's section 200 and section 241(6) claims arising from his work at 2 World Financial Center. Accordingly, the Clerk shall mark the following motions in No. 06-c v-1520 as terminated: Doc. No. 163, Doc. No. 167, Doc. No. 171, Doc. No. 175, Doc. No. 179, Doc. No. 183, Doc. No. 199, Doc. No. 203, Doc. No. 206, Doc. No. 215, and Doc. No. 224. The Clerk shall enter judgment in case number 06-cv-1520 dismissing th e Complaint against Hudson View East, RY, General Re, NASD, BMS, and IET (collectively, the "Dismissed Defendants"), with costs to the Dismissed Defendants. Ropel shall file an Amended Complaint by December 5, 2014, consistent with this Ord er and Opinion, dropping the Dismissed Defendants from the caption and the allegations and retaining the paragraph numbering of the existing complaint. Defendants' Answers need not be amended. re: (175 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summar y Judgment filed by General RE Services Corp., (199 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Weston Solutions, Inc., (206 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Moody's Holdings, Inc., (171 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by American Stock Exchange Clearing LLC, American Stock Exchange Realty Associates LLC, New York City Economic Development Corporation, New York City Ind ustrial Development Agency, Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc., National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., (203 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., (215 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by WFP Tower B Co. L.P., WFP One Liberty Plaza, Co. GP, Corp., Brookfield Properties, LLC, WFP Tower B Holding Co., LP, Brookfield Partners, LP, Brookfield Properties Corporation, Brookfield Properti es Holdings Inc., WFP One Liberty Plaza Co., LP., World Financial Properties, LP., Brookfield Financial Properties, LP, WFP Tower B Co., G.P. Corp., Brookfield Financial Properties, Inc., BFP One Liberty Plaza Co., LLC., (179 in 1:06-cv-0 1520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by HILLMANN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, Hillman Environmental Group, L.L.C., (224 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by The Bank of New York Company, Inc., (163 i n 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by R Y Management Co, Inc., Hudson View East Condominium, (183 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Blackmon-Mooring-Steamatic Catastrophe, Inc ., (167 in 1:06-cv-01520-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by 88 Greenwich L.L.C., Black Diamonds LLC. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 11/13/2014) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:21-mc-00102-AKH, 1:06-cv-01520-AKH (rjm) Modified on 11/14/2014 (soh).
November 5, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 356 ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO PRECLUDE UNRETAINED EXPERTS' TESTIMONY BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE DISCLOSURES re: (5511 in 1:21-mc-00102-AKH) MOTION to Preclude Plaintiffs Non-Retained Experts filed by Defendan ts: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion is GRANTED to the extent they seek to preclude the 18 physicians from providing expert testimony, as described in the foregoing opinion, absent expert disclosure pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(2)(B). The Clerk shall mark motion (Doc. No. 5511) as terminated. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 11/5/2014) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:21-mc-00102-AKH, 1:06-cv-01520-AKH, 1:06-cv-01521-AKH, 1:06-cv-05285-AKH, 1:07-cv-11291-AKH(tn)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ropel et al v. The Bank of New York Company, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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.

Why Is My Information Online?