Spiro et al v. Healthport Technologies, LLC et al
| Charles Spiro, Ann Marie Spiro, Ismael Torres and Tatyana Ruzhinskaya |
| Healthport Technologies, LLC, Mount Sinai Hospital, Montefiore Medical Group Co-op City and Beth Israel Medical Center |
| 1:2014cv02921 |
| April 25, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Paul A. Engelmayer |
| Contract: Recovery/Enforcement |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity: Notice of Removal |
| Both |
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
408
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 407 Memorandum & Opinion in favor of Beth Israel Medical Center, Healthport Technologies, LLC against Tatyana Ruzhinskaya. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's O pinion & Order dated July 7, 2020, the Court reinstates its grant of summary judgment to HealthPort, and Beth Israel's motion for summary judgment is granted, on all claims brought by Ruzhinskaya; accordingly, the case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 7/7/2020) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km)
|
|
Filing
406
ORDER granting 402 Letter Motion to Seal. Granted. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 6/29/2020) (kv)
|
|
Filing
401
ORDER granting 397 Letter Motion to Seal: Granted. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 6/8/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
386
ORDER granting 383 Letter Motion to Seal: The Court has reviewed and approves of the the proposed redactions. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 4/17/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
382
ORDER: Having reviewed the parties' pre-motion letters, Dkts. 37576, 378, the Court sets the following briefing schedule for the anticipated motion for summary judgment by reinstated defendant Beth Israel Medical Center ("Beth Israel") : Beth Israel and plaintiff Tatyana Ruzhinskaya's joint statement of stipulated facts is due April 17, 2020; Beth Israel's motion for summary judgment and memorandum in support is due May 8, 2020; Ruzhinskaya's opposition is due May 29, 2020; and Beth Israel's reply is due June 12, 2020. (Motions due by 5/8/2020. Responses due by 5/29/2020. Replies due by 6/12/2020.) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 3/26/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
374
ORDER: Accordingly, to the extent either party intends to move for summary judgment, the Court sets a deadline of March 11, 2020, for the submission of pre-motion letters, not to exceed three single-spaced pages in length, setting forth the basis for the anticipated motion, including the legal standards governing the claims at issue. Any response(s), also not to exceed three single-spaced pages, shall be submitted by March 18, 2020. Upon reviewing the pre-motion letters, the Court will either set a prompt date for a pre-motion conference or a prompt briefing schedule for the motion(s) for summary judgment. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 2/26/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
368
ORDER: The Court has reviewed the parties' joint letter, Dkt. 367 ("Joint Letter"), addressing next steps in this litigation, in light of the Second Circuits November 1, 2019 remand. The limited purpose of the remand was to return B eth Israel to the case and to litigate plaintiff's dismissed claims against Beth Israel to conclusion, so as to assure that any answers to the questions that the Second Circuit intends to certify to the New York Court of Appeals are given wit h due sensitivity to the distinct postures presented by claims against a non-provider, such as defendant HealthPort Technologies, LLC ("HealthPort"), and a provider, such as voluntarily dismissed defendant Beth Israel Medical Center (&qu ot;Beth Israel"). The limited purpose of this remandto restore Ruzhinskaya's claims against Beth Israel and to bring these to a final judgmentinforms the Court's resolution of the issues raised by the parties. The Court accordingly w ill permit Ruzhinskaya and Beth Israel a limited period of time in which to complete discovery on the claims against Beth Israel. Such discovery is to be completed by February 7, 2020. This date will not be extended. The Court directs counsel to me et and confer to submit, by January 7, 2020, a letter reflecting their agreed-upon plan as to any outstanding discovery. For avoidance of doubt, counsel are at liberty to agree that no further discovery is merited. Following the close of discovery , the Court will set a schedule for, and entertain, summary judgment motions. While a JSF will not be due until after the close of additional fact discovery, if any, on February 7, 2020, the Court asks Ruzhinskaya and Beth Israel, in their Jan uary 7, 2020 joint letter, to notify the Court whether Beth Israel has agreed to stipulate to the facts contained in the existing JSF between Ruzhinskaya and HealthPort. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Discovery due by 2/7/2020.) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 12/23/2019) (jca)
|
|
Filing
358
OPINION & ORDER re: 325 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Healthport Technologies, LLC; 335 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Tatyana Ruzhinskaya. For the reasons above, the Court grants HealthPort 's motion for summary judgment as to all three claims, and denies Ruzhinskaya's motion for partial summary judgment. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate all pending motions and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 3/14/2018) (anc)
|
|
Filing
278
OPINION & ORDER re: 212 MOTION to Preclude the Expert Reports and Testimony of Richard Royston filed by Healthport Technologies, LLC, 220 MOTION to Preclude Testimony of Bryan Hirsch filed by Tatyana Ruzhinskaya. The Court will therefore deny, as premature, Puzhinskaya's motion to preclude Hirsch's testimony, as much as it would have denied, on the same grounds, a motion in limine by HealthPort seeking a pretrial ruling admitting Hirsch's testimony . The Court will permit a timely motion at trial to permit testimony by Hirsch. The Court will resolve any such motion with a close focus on the direction that trial has taken and the probative value, if any, of the particular testimony of Hirsch's that is then proffered. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions pending at Dkts. 212 and 220. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 12/20/2016) (cla)
|
|
Filing
166
OPINION & ORDER: The Court certifies under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure a class defined as follows: All persons, who, at any time from March 12, 2011 to the present (the "Class Period"), paid for, or are obligated to pay for, copies of an individual's patient information requested from Beth Israel Medical Center by a "qualified person" as defined in New York Public Health Law § 18(1)(g), for which copies HealthPort Technologies, LLC charged $0.75 per page (the "Class"). The Court further appoints Tatyana Ruzhinskaya as class representative and Motley Rice LLC as class counsel. (As further set forth in this Order) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 12/17/2015) (kl)
|
|
Filing
152
OPINION & ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies HealthPort's request for an adverse inference instruction based on Ruzhinskaya's counsel's having discarded records it was required to preserve, but holds that a reasonabl e monetary sanction against Ruzhinskaya is merited for this lapse. The Court directs the parties to meet and confer by Tuesday, December 1, 2015, and to attempt in good faith to agree on a reasonable figure, and failing agreement, to brief the issue of the appropriate amount of sanctions on the schedule set out above. (As further set forth in this Order) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 11/19/2015) (kl)
|
|
Filing
151
OPINION & ORDER: For the reasons set forth above, the Court denies Ruzhinskaya's motion for certification of a statewide class. However, the Court stands ready to certify a narrower class, defined at the level of Ruzhinskaya's healthcare provider, Beth Israel, upon such a motion. Any such motion is to be made within two weeks of this decision. (As further set forth in this Order) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 11/9/2015) (kl)
|
|
Filing
38
OPINION & ORDER re: 25 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction , Lack of Standing, Rule 12(b)(1) and Failure to State a Claim, Rule 12(b)(6) filed by Healthport Technologies, LLC, 5 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdictio n , Lack of Standing, Rule 12(b)(1), Failure to State a Claim, Rule 12(b)(6), and Failure to Plead with the Requisite Particularity under Rule 9(b) filed by Healthport Technologies, LLC, 21 MOTION to Dismiss plaintiff's amended complaint filed by Mount Sinai Hospital, Beth Israel Medical Center, 28 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Montefiore Medical Group Co-op City. For the foregoing reasons, the Court dismisses the FAC in its e ntirety. This dismissal is with prejudice, except that plaintiff Rochniak is authorized to file a Second Amended Complaint, limited to her claims for money damages. Specifically, Rochniak may replead Counts One and Two against Healthport and Beth Isr ael, and Count Three against Healthport only. Rochniak will file the Second Amended Complaint by September 12, 2014, and Beth Israel and Healthport will file their respective Answers, or other responsive pleadings, by October 3, 2014. The Court will then set a date and time for the parties to appear for an initial pretrial conference. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 5, 21, 25, and 28. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 8/29/2014) (ajs)
|
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.
