Ross v. Blitzer et al
| Stuart R. Ross |
| David Blitzer, John Doe, Peter Poe and Richard Roe |
| 1:2009cv08666 |
| December 21, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Harold Baer |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
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
17
OPINION AND ORDER:#98378 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs motion to disqualify Blitzer's counsel is denied without prejudice. Based on the representations by Plaintiff s counsel at the Rule 16 conference regarding Plaintiff s condition, thi s action will be placed on the suspense docket for a period of forty-five (45) days from the date hereof. Plaintiff may apply to extend the suspension of the matter for an additional fifteen (15) days for good cause shown. In any event, if neither pa rty advises the Court before that time that Defendant is ready and able to proceed with this action, it will be dismissed for failure to prosecute. If, however, Plaintiff writes the Court to advise that he is prepared to proceed, then his substantive response to the pending motion to dismiss shall be served and filed not more than twenty (20) days after any such communication, and Defendant's reply, if any, shall be submitted five (5) business days after service of plaintiff's opposition. (Signed by Judge Harold Baer on 12/21/2009) (jpo) Modified on 12/22/2009 (eef).
|
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.
