Weisshaus v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey et al
Plaintiff: Yoel Weisshaus
Defendant: The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, The State of New York, New York State Assembly, New York State Senate, The State of New Jersey, New Jersey State Legislator, New Jersey State General Assembly, New Jersey State Senate, John Does and Jane Does
Case Number: 1:2011cv06616
Filed: September 19, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: Unassigned
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
November 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 172 ORDER The Court has received the Port Authority's letter, dated November 9, 2022, ECF No. 171, stating that it has agreed to produce Elizabeth McCarthy as a witness for deposition by Plaintiff. It is not clear to the Court, however, from this l etter, whether Ms. McCarthy will be produced as a witness under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), or as another type of witness under the relevant rules. As such, the parties are instructed to consult and report back to the Court, by letter dated no later than November 18, 2022, specifying the type of witness Ms. McCarthy will be designated as. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton, by Designation on 11/10/2022) (rro)
October 11, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 169 ORDER granting 166 Letter Motion for Local Rule 37.2 Conference. The Court has received Plaintiff's letter-motion for a discovery dispute conference pursuant to Local Civil Rule 37.2. ECF No. 166. Upon consideration of Plaintif's l etter-motion, ECF No. 166, the Port Authority's letter-motion in opposition, ECF No. 167, and Plaintiff's reply letter-motion, ECF No. 168, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for a discovery dispute conference is gran ted; and it is further ORDERED that the parties are instructed to alert the Court by letter dated no later than October 28, 2022, of their availability for a phone conference, to be set up by the parties, during the week of October 31, 2022 to November 4, 2022. (Signed by U.S.D.J., by Designation Richard K. Eaton on 10/11/2022) (vfr)
September 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 165 ORDER denying without prejudice 163 Motion to Strike document 163 CROSS MOTION to Strike Document No. [154, 154-1] . filed by Yoel Weisshaus from the record. Accordingly, it is herebyORDERED that Plaintiffs motion is denied, without prejudice. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton, U.S.D.J., by Designation on 9/16/2022) (rro)
February 24, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 149 ORDER: The Court notes that the deadline by which the parties were to have submitted a joint statement of undisputed material facts, February 15, 2022, has passed with no filing. The Court has received the Port Authority's letter dated February 14, 2022, ECF No. 148, asking to be released from the obligation to submit a joint statement. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer again to prepare a joint statement of undisputed material f acts in this matter; and it is further ORDERED that the new deadline for the joint statement, and the individual statement of the opposing party, if any, shall be March 10, 2022; and it is further ORDERED that, should the Court find that eit her party has failed to cooperate in the preparation of this joint statement, the Court will consider sanctions against the uncooperative Ct. No. 11 Civ. 6616 (RKE) party in an amount equal to attorneys fees incurred in the efforts to prepare and submit the joint statement and to prepare and submit any individual statement. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 2/24/2022) (js)
December 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 145 ORDER re: 142 Letter, filed by Yoel Weisshaus. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's letter-motion, ECF No. 142, is denied in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that, on or before December 16, 2021, Defendant shall sub mit by letter its confirmation that the toll revenues spreadsheet, ECF No. 136-1, is in compliance with the definition of tolls adopted by the Court, ECF No. 140; and it is further ORDERED that, if ECF No. 136-1 does not comply with the Court's definition of tolls, Defendant shall, on or before December 23, 2021, submit an updated spreadsheet showing gross toll revenues for each ITN facility by fiscal year from 2007-2020, in spreadsheet (.pdf or.xlsx) form; and it is further ORDERED that, i n accordance with the scheduling order dated October 15, 2021, ECF No. 138, document discovery is closed; and it is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the same, the deadline has passed for issuing subpoenas to additional Port Authority witnesses for deposition; and it is further ORDERED that the parties shall comply with the remaining deadlines in this case, absent timely requests for extension. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 12/9/2021) (kv)
October 20, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 140 ORDER re: 139 Letter, filed by The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that "tolls" shall be defined as including fees which are imposed by the Port Authority's Tunnels Bridges and Term inals Department for use by the general public of its bridges and tunnels, along with violation penalties and fees that are included in the operating revenues reported in the Port Authority's annual financial statements; and it is further ORDERE D that, by November 8, 2021, the Port Authority shall provide Plaintiff with gross amounts for operating expenses, less any allocated expenses that are connected with non- ITN facilities, recorded by fiscal year from 2007-2020 for each ITN facility in spreadsheet (.pdf or.xlsx) form. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 10/20/2021) (kv)
October 7, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 135 ORDER: In response to the Court's Order dated September 17, 2021, ECF No. 133 , Defendant Port Authority filed a written explanation of the term "write-off" as it has been included in capital investments in Schedule F of its cons olidated financial statements since 2014, and provided an example thereof. See ECF No. 134 . It is hereby ORDERED that, by November 8, 2021, the Port Authority shall provide information to Plaintiff showing gross amounts of capital expenditures, excluding write-offs, for each ITN facility by fiscal year from 2007-2020, in spreadsheet (.pdf or.xlsx) form. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 10/7/2021) (va)
September 17, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 133 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 123 Letter Motion for Discovery. Upon consideration of all papers and proceedings had herein, it is herebyORDERED that Plaintiff's document demands, ECF Nos. 123-2, 125-1, are granted in part and de nied in part, and it is furtherORDERED that the Port Authority provide the following data to Plaintiff by October 18, 2021, in spreadsheet (.pdf or.xlsx) form:1. Gross amounts for toll revenues recorded by fiscal year from 2007-2020 for each ITN faci lity as defined herein, and2. Gross amounts for debt service payments recorded by fiscal year from 2007-2020 for all governmental (ITN) bonds, and it is furtherORDERED that, by October 4, 2021, the Port Authority shall file a written explanation of w hether it is the case that the "allocated expenses" mentioned in the Port Authority's consolidated financial statements as part of the gross operating expenses of the ITN contain expenses allocated to non-ITN facilities; and it is furt herORDERED that, if it is the case that these "allocated expenses" contain expenses allocated to non-ITN facilities, the Port Authority shall provide information showing gross amounts isolating operating expenses for each ITN facility by fi scal year from 2007-2020, in spreadsheet (.pdf or.xlsx) form by October 18, 2021; and it is furtherORDERED that, by October 4, 2021, the Port Authority shall file a written explanation of the term "write-off" as it has been included in capi tal investments in Schedule F of its consolidated financial statements since 2014, and provide an example thereof; and it is furtherORDERED that, by October 18, 2021, the parties shall submit a joint definition of "tolls"for reference in future proceedings going forward.SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton, by Designation on 9/17/2021) (rro)
September 13, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 132 ORDER with respect to 123 Letter Motion for Discovery. The Court has received Plaintiff's reply, ECF No. 130, to Defendant's most recent response in opposition, ECF No. 127. It is hereby ORDERED that neither party shall file any further letters or motion papers with regard to Plaintiffs' outstanding document demands, ECF Nos. 123, 125, without leave of the Court. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 9/10/2021) (va)
June 2, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 118 ORDER: The parties are instructed to alert the Court by letter dated no later than June 3, 2021, of their availability for a conference call during the week of June 7, 2021, for purposes of discussing the substance of the attached Proposed Order. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 6/2/2021) (js)
April 29, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 117 ORDER: The parties are directed to confer concerning the "usual stipulations" made regarding depositions, and to be prepared to report to the Court at the start of the deposition on May 3, 2021 whether or not they have agreed to such st ipulations. It is the Court's understanding that Defendant Port Authority's concerns about the accessibility of documentary exhibits has been eliminated by the features available through vTestify, as demonstrated in the video-conferencing test today, April 29, 2021. If that is not the case, the Port Authority should contact the Court no later than April 30, 2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton, by designation on 4/29/2021) (mml)
April 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 116 ORDER: The Court has received the parties' letters, Dkt. Nos. 113 & 114, addressing potential video-conferencing platforms for use at the deposition of Michael Fabiano scheduled for May 3, 2021. Plaintiff has agreed to assume the cost of use of vTestify.com. The Court will participate in a test of vTestify, facilitated by the court reporting firm Pirozzi & Hillman, on Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 2:00 PM EST, in reliance on the information provided by Plaintiff, Dkt. No. 114. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton, U.S.D.J., by Designation on 4/28/2021) (rro)
April 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 112 ORDER: The Court has received Plaintiff's letter, Dkt. No. 111, requesting that the deposition of Michael Fabiano scheduled for May 3, 2021 shall be held via the video-conferencing platform vTestify.com. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall inform the Court by letter how Judge Eaton and his law clerks may access and use vTestify in the manner necessary to accommodate Judge Eatons ability to rule on objections; and it is further ORDERED that such letter(s) shall be due by Tuesday, April 27, 2021. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Douglas F. Eaton on 4/23/2021) (cf)
April 13, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 110 ORDER, It is hereby ORDERED that, subject to the limitations set forth by Court order in the hearing held February 25, 2021, ECF No. 107, ECF No. 109, Weisshaus' deposition of the Port Authority's designated Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) witn ess, Michael Fabiano, shall be conducted on May 3, 2021 at 9:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time; it is further ORDERED that the deposition shall be held by telephone, consistent with further instruction from the Court; and it is further ORDERED th at, on or before April 19, 2021, Weisshaus shall identify to the Port Authority any documents on which he intends to rely. ( Deposition due by 5/3/2021.) (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton, by Designation on 4/13/21) (yv) Modified on 4/13/2021 (yv).
April 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 109 ORDER: On February 25, 2021, the Court held a discovery hearing and ruled on some of the Port Authority's objections to Weisshaus' discovery demands. The transcript, Dkt. No. 107, contains the rulings of the Court and is So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 4/1/2021) (js)
February 16, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 106 ORDER: Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Court shall hold a discovery hearing on Thursday, February 25, 2021, at 11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time; and it is further ORDERED that the hearing shall be held by telephone, consistent with further instruction from the Court, at which time the Court will rule on at least some of the Port Authority's objections to Weisshaus' discovery demands. So Ordered. (Discovery Hearing set for 2/25/2021 at 11:00 AM before Judge Richard K. Eaton.) (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 2/16/2021) (js)
December 23, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 102 ORDER: In its declaration opposing Plaintiff's motion to compel and supporting its motion for a protective order, ECF No. 95, Defendant stated that it had provided Plaintiff with a thumb drive of the "entire document production" made to AAA in a previous proceeding, AAA Northeast et al. v. The Port Authority, No. 11-6746. In his motion to compel, ECF No. 92, Plaintiff claimed that the documents were not Bates numbered or indexed. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant shall inform the Court by letter of the form in which it originally provided the documents to AAA; and it is further ORDERED that this letter shall be due on or before January 11, 2021, with a copy provided to Plaintiff. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 12/23/2020) (mro)
December 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 101 ORDER with respect to 92 Motion to Compel; with respect to 92 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery; with respect to 94 Motion for Protective Order. it is hereby ORDERED that, in accordance with FED. R. CIV. P. 33, Defendan t's answers to Plaintiff's interrogatories numbered 1-19 are due by January 4, 2021; and it is further ORDERED that Defendant need not answer Plaintiff's interrogatories 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24, as these are clearly outside the scope of the sole issue remaining this case, that is, the setting of tolls to fund projects unconnected to the Port Authority's interdependent transportation system (ITN); and it is further ORDERED that, when answering the interrogatories, Defendant may object to any questions in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and make use of the answers found in its declaration, ECF No. 95; and it is further ORDERED that, in accordance with FED. R. CIV. P. 30(b)(6), Defendant shall designate a witness to be deposed on behalf of the organization. While it would be remarkable if Defendant finds itself unable to comply with the order because it determines that a witness cannot be designated because of unavailability or any other reason, Def endant shall support this contention with an affidavit of an officer of the Port Authority stating the facts relating to its inability to comply; and it is further ORDERED that the Court reserves judgment on all other matters contained in Plaintiff&# 039;s motion to compel, Defendant's opposition to Plaintiff's motion, and Defendant's cross-motion for a protective order. The parties should anticipate a telephone scheduling conference with the Court following Defendant's submission of responses to Plaintiff's interrogatories. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 12/10/2020) (kv)
September 8, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 87 ORDER: denying 86 Letter Motion for Local Rule 37.2 Conference. The Court has received Plaintiff's letter-motion for a discovery dispute conference pursuant to Local Rule 37.2. Dkt. No. 86. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's letter-motion is denied. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 9/08/2020) (ama)
July 16, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 85 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 84 Letter Motion for Discovery. The Court directs that discovery shall proceed as follows: 1. Interrogatories and document demands to be served by August 3, 2020; 2. Fact discovery to be completed by October 15, 2020; 3. Parties to notify the Court whether they intend to introduce experts and require expert discovery by October 20, 2020. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 7/16/2020) (jca)
June 25, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 82 ORDER: Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is converted to one for partial summary judgment, and it is further ORDERED that, on or before July 10, 2020, the parties shall jointly subm it a letter informing the court whether they intend to rely on Defendant's prior submissions, and any responsive submissions provided by Plaintiff, or whether discovery is warranted, and it is further ORDERED that, should one or both of the parties desire discovery, the parties shall submit, with the July 10 letter, a joint proposed schedule for discovery not to exceed three months. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 6/25/2020) (ama)
December 18, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 78 OPINION re: 65 CROSS MOTION to Amend/Correct 37 Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion, 36 Declaration in Support of Motion, MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT filed by Yoel Weisshaus. For the foregoing reasons, the court h olds that the claims in both plaintiff's Amended Complaint and his Proposed Second Amended Complaint fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, the court denies plaintiff's motion for leave to amend his complaint for a second time, and grants defendant's motion to dismiss in its entirety. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 12/17/2018) (ne) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
October 17, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 49 OPINION AND ORDER re: (47 in 1:11-cv-06616-RKE) MOTION to Intervene in support of the pleading of entry 104 in 11-cv-6746(RKE) filed by Yoel Weisshaus: Accordingly, Mr. Weisshaus's motion to intervene is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close document number 111 on the docket of this case. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 10/17/2014) ***As per chambers, Filed in 11cv6746 and 11cv6616. (tn)
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: Weisshaus v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 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: Yoel Weisshaus
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 Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
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 State 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: New York State Assembly
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: New York State Senate
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 State of New Jersey
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: New Jersey State Legislator
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: New Jersey State General Assembly
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: New Jersey State Senate
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: John Does
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: Jane Does
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?