Betances v. Fischer et al
| Paul Betances |
| Brian Fischer, Anthony J. Annucci, Lucien J. LeClaire, Jr., Glenn S. Goord, John Does 1-25, Jane Does 1-25, Andrea W. Evans, Mark Mantei, Terence Tracy, Robert J. Dennison, Anthony G. Ellis, II, George B. Alexander, John Does 26-50 and Jane Does 26-50 |
| 1:2011cv03200 |
| May 11, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Kings |
| Shira A. Scheindlin |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
432
DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 390 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 400 Motion for Summary Judgment. For the foregoing reasons: (1) the parties' motions for partial summary judgment are granted in part and denied in part as set forth above; (2) the Court vacates its prior holding with respect to Nunc Pro Tunc Plaintiffs; and (3) the class is decertified. Determination of damages shall be resolved on an individual basis. To the extent not discussed above, the Court has considered the parties' arguments and determined them to be without merit. The parties shall meet and confer and by 30 days following entry of this decision and order shall file a joint letter proposing next steps, including prospects for conducting a bellwether trial of named or other plaintiffs. SO ORDERED. Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 1/17/2024) (mml)
|
|
Filing
428
DECISION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons: (1) the parties' motions for partial summary judgment are granted in part and denied in part as set forth above; (2) the Court vacates its prior holding with respect to Nunc Pro Tunc Plaintiffs; a nd (3) the class is decertified. Determination of damages shall be resolved on an individual basis. To the extent not discussed above, the Court has considered the parties' arguments and determined them to be without merit. The parties shall meet and confer and by 30 days following entry of this decision and order shall file a joint letter proposing next steps, including prospects for conducting a bellwether trial of named or other plaintiffs. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 12/15/2023) (rro)
|
|
Filing
385
ORDER: Having reviewed counsels' dates of availability (Dkts. 383-84), the trial of general damages for loss of liberty will take place starting November 28, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 18D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY, 10007. The foregoing assumes that issues pending before the Court do not warrant decertification of the class before trial. In the event the Court determines that decertification is warranted, the class-wide trial of general damages for loss of liberty will not proceed. SO ORDERED. Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. ( Jury Trial set for 11/28/2023 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 18D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 5/2/2023) (tg) Modified on 5/2/2023 (tg).
|
|
Filing
382
ORDER: As discussed at the case management conference held on April 19, 2023: To address the implications of the recent Second Circuit Vincent decision, the parties will proceed according to the following deadlines: Cross Motions due by 6/26/2023., Motions due by 5/25/2023., Responses due by 7/10/2023, Replies due by 7/24/2023. The briefing shall address at least the following issues: (i) the impediment/causation issue identified by the majority in Vincent, (ii) this Court's previous rul ing with respect to Nunc Pro Tunc class members, and (iii) implications for continuation as a class action for general loss-of-liberty damages. By May 1, 2023, the parties shall submit blackout dates of availability for trial of general loss-of-liberty damages in September, October, November, and December 2023. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 4/19/2023) Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. (ama)
|
|
Filing
379
ORDER: The Court has reviewed the letter submissions from the parties regarding the potential impact of the Second Circuit's recent Vincent decision on this case, including the impending class trial on general damages for loss of l iberty. (See Dkts. 375-78.) One thing that is clear from the submissions is that a number of issues require further exploration; even Plaintiffs ask to adjourn the trial for expedited briefing and resolution of a summary judgment m otion. Accordingly, (1) trial, currently scheduled to start on May 9, 2023, is adjourned to a date to be determined; and (2) the Court will hold a case management conference to discuss issues raised by the parties' l etters and the procedural path forward. Prior to the case management conference, the parties shall meet and confer regarding the next procedural steps (e.g., further briefing, discovery, etc.) and, at least two days prior to the conference, joi ntly file a status report as to the parties' positions in that respect. My Deputy Clerk will coordinate with the parties to schedule a date for the conference. Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 4/6/2023) (tg)
|
|
Filing
372
ORDER: On March 23, 2023, the Second Circuit issued a decision in Vincent v. Annucci, No. 21-22, addressing damages for reincarceration after wrongfully imposed PRS. By March 30, 2023 the parties shall each submit a letter of no more than three pages addressing how that decision impacts determination of damages in the instant case and particularly whether it has any implications for class certification and the upcoming trial of general damages for loss of liberty. By April 4, 2023, the parties may file a reply of no more than three pages to the other party's initial letter. SO ORDERED. Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 3/23/2023) (tg)
|
|
Filing
364
ORDER: 1. By November 21, 2022, the parties will jointly file a letter setting forth dates during March, April, and May 2023 when they are not available for trial. The Court plans to reserve three days for trial. 2. By December 15, 2022, Defendants shall file a memorandum of law addressing the extent to which, if at all, Plaintiffs' violations of unconstitutionally imposed PRS implicate a defense of failure to mitigate damages. The memorandum shall also address any implications for class a ction status. Plaintiffs shall file their responding brief by January 10, 2023. Defendants shall file their reply, if any, by January 24, 2023. Plaintiffs shall file their sur-reply, if any, by January 31, 2023. Opening briefs shall be no more than 1 5 pages; reply briefs shall be no more than 8 pages. 3. Trial of the plaintiff class's "loss-of-liberty" damages will be by jury, with a unanimous verdict required. 4. The parties concur, and this Court finds, that sufficient notice to the class has been provided. 5. To the extent Defendants have sought to revive their statute of limitations arguments, the request is DENIED. 6. Plaintiffs' motion in limine to preclude argument and testimony about Defendants' liability is GRANTED. Defendants motion to allow such argument and testimony is DENIED. 7. Plaintiffs' motion in limine to preclude argument and testimony about causation is GRANTED. Defendants' motion to allow such argument and testimony is DENIED. 8. Plaintiffs' motion in limine to limit argument and testimony of the type of damages to which Plaintiffs may recover to compensatory damages only is GRANTED; Defendants are precluded from presenting argument or testimony that the jury may consid er awarding nominal damages or no damages. Defendants' motion in limine to allow such argument and testimony is DENIED. The issue of which Plaintiffs may recover which type of damages has been previously determined by this Court. 9. Plaintiffs a gree they are not seeking damages for loss of the right to vote as part of the loss-of-liberty class trial. Accordingly, argument and testimony about loss of the right to vote will be excluded from trial. 10. Defendants' motion in limine to prec lude testimony or argument about damages for "certain specific periods of time" is DENIED with respect to what will be before the jury. Plaintiffs agree they are not seeking damages for periods of time from which they absconded from PRS a nd therefore were at liberty. Plaintiffs also agree that any individual Defendant (namely, Defendant Fischer) does not bear liability for any period of time prior to the time they became employed by DOCS. That issue does not at all affect what the issues for the jury will be at trial. 11. Defendants' motion in limine to permit testimony as to the law governing during different time frames during which referrals for resentencing could have been made is DENIED. 12. Plaintiffs' motion i n limine to preclude argument and testimony about sentencing procedures and resentencing initiatives is GRANTED; Defendants' motion to allow such argument and testimony is DENIED. As explained at the conference, however, the Court will read a s tatement to the jury providing certain general information about sentencing procedures or initiatives to provide context for the jury's benefit. There should be no need for any additional argument or testimony beyond what is presented by the Co urt regarding sentencing procedures and initiatives. This particular ruling is without prejudice to revisiting the issue if warranted after the Court, in conjunction with the parties, has finalized the statement to be read to the jury. 13. Plaintiff s' motion in limine to preclude argument and testimony about the specifics of the offenses for which Plaintiffs were initially incarcerated or for which they were reincarcerated while on PRS is GRANTED; Defendants' motion in limine to allo w such argument and testimony is DENIED. The relevance of argument or testimony beyond the general is outweighed by undue prejudice. These rulings are subject to revision based on the outcome of the Court's determination with respect the mitigat ion issue being briefed by the parties. At the very least, however, the jury may be informed that the Plaintiffs were convicted of felonies for which they were sentenced for at least one year or more, and, where applicable, that they were reincarce rated for violations of the terms of PRS. The exact formulation of what the jury may be told in that regard will be set forth in the Court's statement to the jury and/or final jury instructions. 14. Defendants' motion in limine to limit t he named Plaintiffs' testimony to their own personal experiences on PRS or during reincarceration is GRANTED. 15. All rulings herein are with respect to only the trial of the loss-of-liberty class phase of damages. 16. Reasons for the foregoing rulings were stated on the record. Additional reasons are found in the prior rulings and decisions of the Court. SO ORDERED. Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. (Reply Brief due by 1/24/2023, Responses Brief due by 1/10/2023, Surreplies due by 1/31/2023.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 11/18/2022) (mml)
|
|
Filing
353
ORDER granting 352 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. Extension granted. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 8/31/2022) (kv)
|
|
Filing
334
DECISION AND ORDER: CLASS DECERTIFICATION denying 307 Motion in Limine. For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that the class should be maintained for the purposes of trial to determine general damages for loss of liberty. Defendants' motion to decertify the class at this juncture is therefore denied. To the extent not discussed above, the Court has considered the Defendants' arguments and finds them to be without merit. Within fourteen days of entry of this decision, the p arties shall file a joint letter setting forth (1) a schedule for completing notice to the class, (2) a schedule for filing any outstanding pre-trial materials required by this Courts individual rules, (3) a description of any remaining pre-trial in limine issues that have not been resolved, and (4) dates during the third quarter of 2022 when the parties are not available for trial. SO ORDERED. Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 3/14/2022) (mml)
|
|
Filing
332
ORDER: On June 10, 2021, the Court requested supplemental briefing regarding whether the class should be preserved for trial of general damages on loss of liberty. (Dkt. 321.) After reviewing the parties' submissions (see Dkts. 326, 329, 330), the Court requests that the parties provide answers to the following questions by December 31, 2021. The parties shall meet and confer and file a joint document. To the extent the parties do not agree on the responses, the joint filing shall reflect each party's respective answer, as further set forth in this Order. Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 12/8/2021) (mml)
|
|
Filing
322
ORDER: As per the conference held on June 20, 2021: 1. Defendants' suggestion that the Court reconsider the statute of limitations issuein light of Chavez v. Occidental Petroleum (N.Y. 2020), is denied. 2. Defendants' request to exclude t he testimony of Shawn Smith is denied; however, Defendants may depose Mr. Smith. 3. Defendants' request to revisit qualified immunity in light of Early v. Annucci (2d Cir. 2020) is denied. All other issues that are subject of the parties' motions in limine and pre-trial briefs are denied without prejudice to renewal at an appropriate juncture. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 6/10/2021) (mml)
|
|
Filing
272
ORDER: This Order responds to the parties' joint letter dated September 11, 2020 (Dkt. 271), inquiring about the likelihood of the jury trial in this case going forward as currently scheduled in early November. This case is one of several that are designated as potentially being trial ready at that time. Given the priority given to criminal trials, and the backlog in jury trials as a result of the pandemic, there is hardly a guarantee of trial taking place as scheduled. At the same time, o ther variables - settlement of other cases, adjournments in other cases, etc. - could operate in favor of trial in early November. The bottom line is that I cannot offer a firm prediction either way as to what will happen. In light of that uncertaint y and the parties concerns about completing requisite remaining tasks on schedule, the Court will entertain a proposal for a revised schedule. Should the parties wish to make a proposal, they shall do so by September 23, 2020. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 9/14/2020) Copies transmitted to all counsel of record. (mml)
|
|
Filing
266
ORDER: For the reasons stated during the conference held on June 25, 2020: by July 9, 2020, Defendants shall provide to Plaintiffs a list of proposed "subgroups" of class members, which shall include for each at least the following: (1) a description of the "subgroup"; (2) the reasons for forming that subgroup; and (3) the role that subgroup would play in advancing settlement or at trial. By July 16, 2020, the parties shall meet and confer on Defendants' propose d subgroups. The parties shall contact the Deputy Clerk to schedule a status conference with this Court to take place in early to mid-August. At least three days prior to the conference, the parties shall file a joint letter describing the issues to be discussed at the conference. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 6/25/2020) Copies transmitted to all counsel of record. (mml)
|
|
Filing
259
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 1.4 of the Local Rules for the United States District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, I, Barbara K. Hathaway, an Assistant Attorney General at t he Office of Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York, attorney for defendants Fischer, Annucci and Tracy in the above-entitled action, hereby withdraws as an attorney of record for Defendants Fischer, Annucci and Tracy, as I am le aving the Office of the Attorney General and am no longer assigned to the defense of this case on the Attorney Generals behalf. The Office of the Attorney General will continue to serve as counsel of record to Defendants in the above-referenced matte r, and this matter will continue to be handled by Assistant Attorney General Michael Keane. Therefore, I hereby request that the Court grant my withdrawal and that my appearance be removed from the docket. IT IS SO ORDERED. Attorney Barbara Kathryn Hathaway terminated. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 5/18/2020) (mml)
|
|
Filing
246
ORDER: For the reasons stated during the conference held on January 14, 2020: 1. Expert discovery in this action will not be stayed pending the Second Circuit's adjudication of Earley v. Annucci, No. 18-3739. 2. By April 14, 2020, Defendants sha ll complete all data analysis required to determine class membership, and for each member, their time of re-incarceration, supervised release, and other data points relevant to the parties' damages assessment. The Court will not grant any extens ions to this deadline. If there is any doubt as to the relevant data points, the parties shall meet and confer to make sure they have an agreement as to what they are by January 28, 2020. 3. The parties shall meet and confer regarding proposed deadli nes for expert discovery, motions and pre-trial filings. By January 28, 2020, the parties shall submit the proposed schedule to the Court or inform the Court as to why parties are unable to agree. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 1/14/2020) Copies transmitted to all counsel of record. (mml)
|
|
Filing
121
OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' motion for an Order certifying defendants' interlocutory appeal as frivolous and retaining this Court's jurisdiction pending the appeal is GRANTED. SO ORDERED. (As further set forth within this Opinion.) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 10/14/2015) (ajs)
|
|
Filing
112
OPINION AND ORDER re: 100 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on liability against Defendants Fischer, Annucci and Tracy. filed by Gabriel Velez, Lloyd A. Barnes, Paul Betances, 90 MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by Anthony J. Annucci, Mark Mantei, Lucien J. LeClaire, Jr., Glenn S. Goord, Andrea W. Evans, Terence Tracy, George B. Alexander, Anthony G. Ellis, II, Brian Fischer, Robert J. Dennison. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED as to defendants Goord, LeClaire, Dennison, Alexander, Evans, Ellis, and Mantei, and DENIED as to the remaining defendants and as to qualified immunity. Defendants' motion to modify the class is also DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this motion (Dkt. No. 58). A conference is scheduled for September 2, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. SO ORDERED. (As further set forth within this Order.) (Status Conference set for 9/2/2015 at 04:30 PM before Judge Shira A. Scheindlin.), Robert J. Dennison (in his individual capacity), Robert J. Dennison (former Chair of DOP), Anthony G. Ellis, II (in his individual capacity), Anthony G. Ellis, II (former Executiv e Director of DOP), Andrea W. Evans (in her individual capacity), Andrea W. Evans (in her capacity as Chair and Chief Executive Officer of the New York State Division of Parole (DOP)), Glenn S. Goord (Individually), Glenn S. Goord (former Commiss ioner of DOCS), Lucien J. LeClaire, Jr (former Acting Commissioner of DOCS), Lucien J. LeClaire, Jr (Individually), Mark Mantei (in his capacity as Executive Director of DOP), Mark Mantei (in his individual capacity), George B. Alexander (in his individual capacity) and George B. Alexander (former Chair and Chief Executive Officer of DOP) terminated. (Signed by Judge Leonard B. Sand on 8/6/2015) (ajs)
|
|
Filing
77
OPINION AND ORDER re: 58 MOTION to Certify Class filed by Gabriel Velez, Lloyd A. Barnes, Paul Betances. For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiffs' motion for class certification is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed t o close this motion (Docket No. 58). A conference is scheduled for February 10, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. SO ORDERED. ( Status Conference set for 2/10/2015 at 04:30 PM before Judge Shira A. Scheindlin.) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 1/28/2015) (ama)
|
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.
