Kovalchik v. The City of New York et al
Plaintiff: Ashley Autumn Kovalchik
Defendant: The City of New York and Tony Simmons
Case Number: 1:2009cv04546
Filed: May 13, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: Kings
Presiding Judge: Richard M. Berman
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
July 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 98 OPINION & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION adopting 82 Report and Recommendation: Plaintiff Ashley Autumn Kovalchik brings this action against Defendant Tony Simmons, a former employee of the City of New York's Department of Juvenile Ju stice, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court is the March 21, 2016 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Frank Maas (the "Report"), which recommends that the Court award Kovalchik $300,000 in compensatory damages, $ ;300,000 in punitive damages, $4,040 in attorney's fees, and $350 in costs. Also before the Court is Simmons' request that the Court set aside the entry of default. For the foregoing reasons, Simmons' motion to set aside the entry of default is denied. The Court adopts the Report in full. Kovalchik is hereby awarded $604,390, which includes $300,000 in compensatory damages, $300,000 in punitive damages, $4,040 in attorney's fees, and $350 in costs. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate all pending motions and to close this case. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 7/21/2017) (jwh)
September 18, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 64 OPINION AND ORDER re: 48 FIRST MOTION for Summary Judgment. filed by The City of New York, 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Ashley Autumn Kovalchik. The City of New York's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and Plaintiff& #039;s motions for summary judgment against the City of New York and Defendant Simmons are DENIED. If Plaintiff wishes to move for a default judgment against Simmons, she shall submit the appropriate materials within thirty days of this Order. In the event she does not do so, her remaining claims may be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(b). The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to close the motions pending at docket numbers 48 and 55. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 9/18/2014) (ajs)
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: Kovalchik v. The City of New York et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ashley Autumn Kovalchik
Represented By: Jon Louis Norinsberg
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: The City of New York
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: Tony Simmons
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.


Why Is My Information Online?