Winfield et al v. City Of New York
| Janell Winfield, Tracey Stewart and Shauna Noel |
| City of New York |
| 1:2015cv05236 |
| July 7, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Laura Taylor Swain |
| Housing/Accommodations |
| 28:1331 |
| 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
720
OPINION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DEPOSITION re: 711 LETTER MOTION for Discovery: For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 4/2/2019) (jwh) Modified on 4/2/2019 (jwh).
|
|
Filing
689
OPINION AND ORDER: Defendant seeks to redact certain information that it claims is non-responsive and privileged from the following documents that the Court held in its December Order were not privileged and subject to disclosure: 49, 57, 64, and 35 0. Defendant's request is DENIED except that these documents may be designated "Confidential" pursuant to the Protective Order in place in this action, and as further set forth in this Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/23/2019) (jca)
|
|
Filing
660
OPINION AND ORDER. The Court appends a spreadsheet reflecting the Court's rulings on the 500 documents. The Court also includes its own description of the documents in column R. The City is directed to re-review its privilege log consistent w ith this ruling and determine whether there are additional documents on its log that must be de-designated as privileged. The City shall complete this task by January 31, 2019 and provide Plaintiffs with an updated log and supplemental production by that date. To the extent there are objections to this ruling, or Plaintiffs believe that the Court should re-evaluate the balance of Rodriguez factors or wish to make a substantial need argument as to a specific document protected by the work p roduct doctrine, this Court requests that the parties first file a motion for reconsideration with this Court. The parties shall notify the Court by letter if they intend to request reconsideration of a ruling as to a particular document by Decemb er 31, 2018. The Court will then set a briefing schedule as to any such motion. To the extent the City does not dispute this Courts ruling with respect to documents deemed non-privileged, it shall produce such documents by January 31, 2019. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 12/18/2018) (anc)
|
|
Filing
656
MEMORANDUM ORDER: The Court concludes that Judge Parker's order was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Plaintiffs' objection is, therefore, overruled and Judge Parker's September 14, 2017, Oral Order stands. This Memorandum Opinion and Order resolves Docket Entry No. 185. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 12/12/2018) (ama)
|
|
Filing
649
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: for 601 Report and Recommendations. The Court has reviewed carefully Magistrate Judge Parker's thorough and well reasoned Report and Recommendation and finds no clear error. The Court therefore adopt s the Report in its entirety for the reasons stated therein. Accordingly, Plaintiff Janell Winfield is dismissed form this case and the Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption of this case accordingly. This Order resolves docket entry no. 552. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 12/03/2018) (ama)
|
|
Filing
547
OPINION AND ORDER re: 454 LETTER MOTION for Discovery (clawed-back OMB briefing document) addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Craig Gurian dated June 15, 2018. LETTER MOTION to Seal Document (exhibit 1 and le tter-motion redactions) addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Craig Gurian dated June 15, 2018. filed by Emmanuella Senat, Shauna Noel. Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Disclosure of the October PPT is DENIED. The parties a re further directed to submit a joint letter to the Court three days in advance of the next Case Management Conference setting forth a proposed agenda and summarizing open discovery issues for discussion. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 9/13/18) (yv)
|
|
Filing
545
OPINION AND ORDER re: 494 CROSS MOTION for Protective Order . filed by City of New York, 483 MOTION to Compel Mayor Bill de Blasio to to appear and give testimony at a deposition noticed pursuant to FRCP 30 . filed by Emmanuella Senat, Shauna Noel. Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel the Deposition of Mayor Bill de Blasio is DENIED and Defendant's Cross-Motion for a Protective Order is GRANTED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 9/12/18) (yv)
|
|
Filing
491
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: for 430 Report and Recommendation. The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker's May 30, 2018 Report and Recommendation (the "Report") (docket entry no. 430) which recommend s that plaintiff Tracey Stewart be dismissed for failure to prosecute. No objections to the Report have been received. In reviewing a report and recommendation, a district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings o r recommendations made by the magistrate [judge]." 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(C) (LexisNexis 2017). "In a case such as this one, where no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear err or on the face of the record." Johnson v. New York University School of Education, No. 00 Civ. 8117, at *1, 2003 WL 21433443 (S.D.N.Y. June 16, 2003). The Court has reviewed carefully Magistrate Judge Parker's thorough and well reasoned Rep ort and finds no clear error. The Court therefore adopts the Report in its entirety for the reasons stated therein. Accordingly, Stewart is dismissed from this action and the Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption accordingly. This Order resolves docket entry no. 381. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 7/18/2018). *** Party Tracey Stewart terminated. (ama) Modified on 7/18/2018 (ama).
|
|
Filing
408
OPINION AND ORDER. Plaintiffs' motion to compel certain data production is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 5/18/18) (yv)
|
|
Filing
393
OPINION AND ORDER. Plaintiffs' request for a compelled "quick peek" procedure is DENIED. Plaintiffs' motion is DENIED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 5/10/18) (yv)
|
|
Filing
268
OPINION AND ORDER. Plaintiffs' motion to compel is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, and the City's motion for a protective order is GRANTED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 2/12/18) (yv)
|
|
Filing
259
OPINION AND ORDER. Plaintiffs' objections to the City's clawback demand are DENIED; Plaintiffs' objections to the City's privilege log are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; and the City's assertions of privilege during de positions are SUSTAINED in part and OVERRULED in part. The City is directed to produce the documents Bates-stamped NYC _0067301, NYCPRIV01218, NYCPRIV01728, NYCPRIV00090, NYCPRIV02127, NYCPRIV01387, NYCPRIV01840, and NYCPRIV02361, as well as redacted copies of the documents Bates-stamped NYCPRIV00548, NYC_0056994, NYCPRIV00399, and NYCPRIV00726 in accordance with this opinion. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 2/1/18) (yv)
|
|
Filing
217
OPINION & ORDER re: 209 LETTER MOTION for Discovery compliance with local rules addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Melanie V. Sadok dated November 13, 2017. filed by City of New York. Plaintiffs request (Doc. No. 208) is granted in part and denied in part. The Citys request for the Court to disregard Plaintiffs application (Doc. No. 209) is denied as moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the gavel pending in connection with Doc. No. 209. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 11/27/17) (yv)
|
|
Filing
148
OPINION AND ORDER re: 136 LETTER MOTION for Discovery regarding plaintiffs' oral request to post on ECF a preliminary expert report based on confidential data addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from William H. Vidal dated June 12, 2017. filed by City of New York. Plaintiffs' request is denied. It is premature at this stage of the litigation to lift the Protective Order as to the preliminary expert report. See In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, 45 4 F. Supp. 2d at 222 (a "court may impose an initial protective order based upon a general showing of good cause, and may modify that order at a later time if more specific grounds for its continuance remain indiscernible"). If and when final expert reports may need to be filed with the Court, the parties can address whether the Protective Order should be lifted and the reports publicly filed. In the meantime, analyses of the confidential affordable housing lottery data will remain subject to the Protective Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 7/5/17) (yv)
|
|
Filing
42
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 17 MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint. filed by City of New York. Defendants motion to dismiss the FAC is denied. The next pre-trial conference is scheduled for December 2, 2016, at 10:30 a.m . The parties must confer and prepare submissions in accordance with the initial conference order (docket entry no. 9) prior to the conference. This Memorandum Opinion and Order resolves docket entry number 17. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 10/24/2016) (kgo)
|
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 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.
