Newton v. The City of New York et al
| Alan Newton |
| The City of New York, Mario Merola, Robert T. Johnson, Andrea Freund, Various John Does, Various Jane Does, Joanne Newbert, Phillip Galligan, (John Doe) Hartfield, (John Doe) Ryan, (John Doe) Harris, Douglas Leho, William Sean O'Toole, Michael Sheehan, Patrick J. McGuire, (John Doe) Haskins, (Jane Doe) Kiely and Jack Trabitz |
| 1:2007cv06211 |
| July 3, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Kings |
| Shira A. Scheindlin |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
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
246
OPINION AND ORDER: The Opinion and Order filed March 4, 2016 (the "March 4, 2016" Opinion) is hereby withdrawn and replaced with this Amended Opinion and Order, filed March 17, 2016. This Amended Opinion contains edits - which do not al ter any of the rulings herein - on the following pages: 2, 4, 9, and 34. This Amended Opinion also requires Newton to consent to the remittitur within seven days, or a new damages trial will be ordered. (As further set forth in this Opinion) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 3/17/2016) (kl)
|
|
Filing
242
OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, defendants' Rule 59(a) motion for a new trial is DENIED and defendants Rule 59(e) motion for remittitur is GRANTED. The Court orders remittitur of Newtons Section 1983 award in excess of twelve million dollars. If Newton does not accept this reduced award, a new trial will be ordered on the issue of damages. SO ORDERED. (As further set forth in this Opinion) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 3/4/2016) (kl)
|
|
Filing
217
OPINION AND ORDER, re: 207 MOTION to Set Aside Verdict. filed by The City of New York, Patrick J. McGuire, Jack Trabitz. For the foregoing reasons, the City's motion to set aside the verdict is granted in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this motion [Docket No. 207] and this case. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 5/12/11) (pl)
|
|
Filing
200
OPINION AND ORDER, that for the foregoing reasons, defendants' Rule 50 motion to dismiss plaintiffs negligence claim is granted, and plaintiffs cross-motion is denied. All other Rule 50 motions, made at the close of plaintiffs case, are denied in their entirety. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 10/22/10) (pl) Modified on 10/22/2010 (pl).
|
|
Filing
192
OPINION AND ORDER accordingly, plaintiff does not meet the standard for reconsideration, and his request for leave to file a motion for reconsideration is denied. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 9/20/10) (cd)
|
|
Filing
190
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re: 145 MOTION to Dismiss and/or Preclude Pursuant to Rule 37(b)(2), for Reconsideration Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6.3, and to Dismiss all Reinstated Claims Pursuant to Rule 12(c). MOTION to Dismiss and/or Preclude Pursua nt to Rule 37(b)(2), for Reconsideration Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6.3, and to Dismiss all Reinstated Claims Pursuant to Rule 12(c). filed by The City of New York. For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion to dismiss the reinstated claims regarding plaintiff s third, sixth, and ninth causes of action is granted. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this motion (docket no. 145). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 9/14/2010) (jmi)
|
|
Filing
135
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. For the foregoing reasons, Newton's motions for leave to amend the complaint are granted as to Newton's federal claims. Newton also seeks to deposit all New Defendants. The other extent those depositions have not yet occurred, Newton's request is granted, but the scope is limited to the remaining claims. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close these motions (Docket nos. 73 and 92). (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 4/1/10) (djc)
|
|
Filing
132
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: #98497 92 SECOND MOTION to Add Party(ies) Alan Newton. filed by Alan Newton, 73 FIRST MOTION to Add Party(ies) Alan Newton. filed by Alan Newton. For the foregoing reasons, Newton's motions for leave to amend the complaint are granted in part and denied in part. Newton also seeks to depose all New Defendants. To the extent those depositions have not yet occurred, Newton's request is granted, but the scope is limited to the remaining claims. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close these motions (Docket nos. 73 and 92). SO ORDERED (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 1/27/2010) (jmi) Modified on 1/28/2010 (ajc).
|
|
Filing
128
ORDER: It is hereby ordered that defendants are to produce former employees Major, Dundas, and Brandow by January 20,2010. No further extensions will be granted. Defendants are directed to provide plaintiff with sufficient notice prior to producing t hese witnesses and plaintiff is directed to make himself available to take their deposition. Defendants cannot be ordered to produce Higgins, Hackson, or Nathason because defendants cannot produce individuals whom they cannot identify. Plaintiff has been asked repeatedly to produce additional identifying information regarding these individuals. Either plaintiff refuses to do so or none exists. If plaintiff can supply additional identifying information, defendants are directed to produce these i ndividuals as well to the extent such information leads to their identification. That this action has required an inordinate amount of the Court's time to resolve discovery issues demonstrates that the parties are not cooperating as contemplate d by the discovery rules. I This Court will no longer tolerate letters from either side squabbling over discovery issues. Counsel are directed to undertake all reasonable efforts to resolve future discovery disputes in good faith prior to seeking relief from this Court. Any evidence to the contrary will result in sanctions against the culpable party. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 12/21/2009) (jpo)
|
|
Filing
110
ORDER...Accordingly, plaintiff does not meet the standard for reconsideration and plaintiff's request is denied. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 11/10/09) (cd)
|
|
Filing
106
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Therefore, Newton's motion is denied and the June 30, 2009 Order is affirmed. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this motion (docket no. 98). (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 10/13/2009) (jfe)
|
|
Filing
104
OPINION AND ORDER:#97824 For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion for partial summary judgment is granted. Claims one, two, four, eleven, and twelve are dismissed in their entirety. Claims six, eight, nine, and fifteen are dismissed in part , insofar as they claim harms resulting from investigatory activities. Newton still maintains numerous constitutional and tort claims against both the City and individual defendants concerning the loss of the rape kit after trial. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this motion (docket no. 49). (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 7/31/2009) (jpo) Modified on 8/3/2009 (eef).
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER: If any portion of this case survives summary judgment, defendants must file their opposition within two weeks of this Court's decision. Plaintiff will then have one week to file a reply. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 6/26/2009) (jpo)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER: that the memorandum shall be produced in redacted form to protect against the disclosure of such core work product. Moreover, to the extent the document, which was apparently sent to Plaintiff by e-mail, contains counsels legal advice to Plain tiff, such advice should also be redacted, to protect against disclosure of privileged communications. Also before the Court is a request by Plaintiff that Defendant be compelled (1) to produce a copy of defendant Trabitzs file regarding Plaintiffs c laim sufficiently in advance of defendant Trabitzs continued deposition date to enable adequate deposition preparation by Plaintiffs counsel, (2) to produce the original of this file for inspection at the deposition, and (3) to compel Defendants to p roduce a copy of the report that Sergeant O'Connor prepared regarding his investigation into Plaintiffs claim. The first two of these requests are granted. If defendant Trabitz's file has not already been produced, Defendants are directed t o provide it to Plaintiffs counsel at least two business days before the rescheduled deposition, and Defendants are also directed to produce the original file at the deposition. As for Plaintiffs third request, unless the Court hears an objection fro m Defendants by the close of business on April l3, 2009, Defendants shall produce Sergeant O'Connor's report to Plaintiff no later than April 15, 2009. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Debra C. Freeman on 4/10/2009) Copies Sent By Chambers.(tve)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER: It is hereby ordered that, following a discovery conference on January 22, 2009, depositions shall proceed according to following schedule as set forth herein. ENDORSEMENT: Except that the Court expects counsel to work cooperatively and in goo d faith to resolve any minor disputes regarding the derivative of any of these depositions. In other words, if a deposition limited above to 3 hours can be completed in 3 hours and 10 minutes, the Court does not expect counsel to have to return to the Court to argue about 10 minutes. Counsel should be able to work this out. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Debra C. Freeman on 2/3/2009) (jpo) Modified on 3/1/2009 (jpo).
|
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 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.
