Jimenez-Rodoli v. District 15 Machinist's Union
Plaintiff: Manuel M. Jimenez-Rodoli
Defendant: District 15 Machinist's Union
Case Number: 1:2010cv08378
Filed: November 5, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: New York
Presiding Judge: Loretta A. Preska
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 1002
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 11, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER for 42 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief filed by Alberto Jimenez, 45 Application for Court to Request Counsel filed by Alberto Jimenez, 43 Report and Recommendations, 28 Motion for Joinder filed by District 15 Machinist's Union. Fo r the foregoing reasons, the Court adopts Judge Fox's Report in its entirety, save that, in its discretion, the Court elects to dismiss the action without prejudice to Alberto's re-filing, should he obtain counsel to represent him. See Lyel l Theatre Corp. v. Loews Corp., 682 F.2d 37, 43 (2d Cir. 1982) ("[T]he sanction of dismissal... may be without prejudice if so specified by the court imposing it."); see also Liang v. Lucky Plaza Restaurant, No. 12 Civ. 5077 (PAC)(GWG), 201 3 WL 3757036 (S.D.N.Y. July 17, 2013) (dismissing action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b)). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 28, 42, and 45, and to close this case. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/11/2013) (lmb)
March 21, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 33 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: By an order dated February 7,2013, plaintiff Alberto Jiminez, the voluntary administrator for the estate of Manual M. Jiminez-Rodoli, who is proceeding prose, was directed to submit competent evidence to the Court showing whethe r any creditors or beneficiaries of the estate, other than the voluntary administrator, exist. In response, the plaintiff submitted a sworn statement, Docket Entry No. 32, indicating that he is not the sole beneficiary of the estate. The administrato r of an estate may not proceed pro se when the estate has beneficiaries or creditors other than the administrator. See Guest v. Hansen, 603 F.3d 15, 17 (2d Cir. 2010); Pridgen v. Andresen, 113 F.3d 391,393 (2d Cir. 1997). Therefore, the plaintiff mus t obtain an attorney to represent him in this action and, on or before April 23, 2013, that attorney must file a notice of appearance with the Clerk of Court. Should the plaintiff fail to obtain counsel to represent him in this action timely, it may result in the dismissal of the action. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 3/21/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (rsh)
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: Jimenez-Rodoli v. District 15 Machinist's Union
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Manuel M. Jimenez-Rodoli
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: District 15 Machinist's Union
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?