Mark et al v. Gawker Media LLC et al
| Aulistar Mark, Hanchen Lu and Andrew Hudson |
| Gawker Media LLC and Nick Denton |
| 1:2013cv04347 |
| June 21, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Alison J. Nathan |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards |
| 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
178
MEMORANDUM & ORDER granting 147 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 153 Motion to Certify Class; denying 154 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment and mot ion for class certification are denied. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted. This resolves Dkt. Nos. 147, 153, and 154. The clerk of court is instructed to close the case. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 3/29/2016) (cf)
|
|
Filing
171
ORDER: the Court provisionally grants the parties' request to redact the highlighted portions of the supporting documents containing email addresses, telephone numbers, and individuals' names where linked to online "handles" or nicknames. In the interest of protecting confidential business information, the Court also provisionally grants the parties' request to redact the highlighted portions of the exhibits containing internal Gawker URLs, usernames, and passw ords. With respect to all of the proposed redactions, Plaintiffs shall promptly file the redacted version of the exhibits and the Court will file under seal unredacted versions of the relevant documents. Plaintiffs shall submit courtesy cop ies to the Court. The Court does caution the parties, however, as it has previously stated, that its reliance in a written opinion on a specific piece of information meant that "the presumption of access outweighs the asserted interest in main taining the confidentiality" of that information. In re A2P SMS Antitrust Litig., 972 F. Supp. 2d 465, 494 n.15 (S.D.N. Y. 2013). Before ruling on the Plaintiffs' motions for class certification and summary judgment, it is impossible to determine what material the Court will rely upon in its decisions, and it is probable that information relied upon will be subject to a heightened presumption of access. Cf Standard Inv., 347 F. App'x at 617. Thus, the Court may revisit this decision following the resolution of the parties' motions or upon request. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 11/16/2015) (tn)
|
|
Filing
80
ORDER re: 74 Letter filed by Aulistar Mark. For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED that: 1) the opt-in period shall be 60 days; 2) equitable tolling shall not apply; 3) Plaintiffs may not use Defendant's logos on their notice; 4) Defend ants are not required to post hard-copy notice in their offices; 5) Defendants are not required to post notice on their websites and blogs; and 6) Plaintiffs may send notice via social media sites, subject to the Court's further approval of the form and content of such notice. This resolves Docket No. 74. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 11/3/2014) (lmb)
|
|
Filing
66
MEMORANDUM & ORDER granting 15 Motion to Certify Class. For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiffs' motion for conditional certification and court authorized notice under§ 216(b) of the FLSA is GRANTED. In its opposition brief, Gawker r equests "an opportunity to meet and confer with Plaintiffs' counsel concerning the proposed notice." Def. Opp. at 24. That request is granted. Counsel for the parties are hereby directed to meet and confer regarding the content and dis semination of the notice and to submit a joint proposal to the Court by August 31, 2014. If the parties are unable to reach complete agreement, they should submit a joint letter by the same date. Their letter should (1) represent that the parties hav e met and conferred, (2) identify the precise issues on which disagreement remains, and (3) set forth each side's position on those issues. The parties should cite case law from courts in this Circuit that supports their arguments. After resolving any remaining issues, the Court will direct the parties to submit a joint proposed notice that reflects such resolution. This resolves Docket No. 15. SO ORDERED.(Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 8/15/2014) (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.
