Bryant v. Silverman et al
| Anne Bryant |
| Noel L. Silverman, Patrick J Monaghan Jr, Esq, John and Jane Does 1-5 and ABC Corporations 1-5 |
| 1:2015cv08427 |
| October 26, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Unassigned |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
206
OPINION & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION for 204 Report and Recommendations. The majority of Bryant's objections are not to the R&R, but instead to the Order Magistrate Judge Pitman issued concurrently with the R&R which sets a de adline for pretrial submissions. Dkt. 203. Since that Order is not before the Court, those objections are irrelevant to the Court's decision here to adopt or reject the R&R. Bryant's sole remaining objection is to R&R's Background S ection which states that the parties engaged in "negotiation." R&R at 3. According to Bryant, "there was no negotiation" because "Defendant Monaghan is not negotiable." Dkt. 205 at 3. Since the R&R does not rely on thi s fact in its legal analysis (ultimately resolved in Bryant's favor), the objection is immaterial. The Court reviews the remainder of the R&R for clear error. Finding none, the Court adopts the R&R. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at Dkts. 185 and 191. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 9/3/2019) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ks)
|
|
Filing
170
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 161 Report and Recommendation. For the foregoing reasons, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Pitman's R&R in its entirety. Accordingly, the Court DENIES both parties' motions for summary judgment. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all pending motions in this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 9/12/2018) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
|
|
Filing
147
OPINION & ORDER. On September 1, 2017, Monaghan filed a letter with the Court claiming that "[t]here is no Federal Rule of procedure for changing your mind" and consenting to a dismissal with prejudice. See Dkt. 116 at 1. Hence, he reques ts that the Court enter an order confirming Bryant's request for a dismissal of this action with prejudice and without costs to any party. See id. at 2. The Court cannot do as Monaghan requests. No stipulation of dismissal "signed by all parties" was filed with the Court under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Even if the Court construes the Notice as a request for dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), Bryant has withdrawn the request, and Monaghan cites no authority providing that such a withd rawal is invalid. Under these circumstances, it would be improper for the Court to dismiss the action with prejudice. Therefore, Bryant's Notice at Docket 113 is deemed withdrawn. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 3/13/18) Copies mailed by Chambers. (yv)
|
|
Filing
142
OPINION AND ORDER re: 93 MOTION for Leave to File SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS PURS. TO FE.R.CIV.P. 15(c) AND 15(d), filed by Anne Bryant. Plaintiff's motion to file a second amended complaint is denied. Given the age of this matter and the multiple opportunities plaintiff has had to state her claims, plaintiff is denied leave to further amend her complaint. The only remaining claim in this action will be plaintiff's legal malpractice claim against Monaghan, based on: (1) Monaghan's alleged conflict of interest with Kinder and (2) Monaghan's allegedly deficient filings in the 2000 N.Y.S. Action. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to mark Docket Item 93 closed. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 2/14/2018) Copies Mailed And Transmitted By Chambers. (ras)
|
|
Filing
103
OPINION AND ORDER re: 101 NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL. Plaintiff's First Notice of Voluntary Dismissal was deemed ineffective and invalid; the Court thus cannot do as Monaghan requests. See Dkt. 51. But for exactly the same reasons that Mag istrate Judge Pitman found Plaintiff's First Notice of Voluntary Dismissal invalid, the Court similarly finds Plaintiff's most recent Notice untimely and ineffective. She has lost her right to voluntarily dismiss the action unilaterally, wi thout prejudice; the time period for doing so has long passed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). She must either consent to dismissal with prejudice by entering a stipulation pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), or reply, if she wished, to M onaghan's June 21, 2017 Opposition to her May 24, 2017 Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Pleadings. Dkts. 93, 97. Plaintiff's Rule 41 Notice seeking to voluntarily dismiss the action without prejudice is ineffective. The reference to Magistrate Pitman is continued. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 6/26/2017) Copies mailed by Chambers. (ras) Modified on 6/26/2017 (ras).
|
|
Filing
100
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: re: 85 MOTION for an Order to Void the Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice of Defendant Noel L. Silverman, Esq. filed by Anne Bryant. The Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in wh ole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). "To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate, to which no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy it self that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Nelson v. Smith, 618 F. Supp. 1186, 1189 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). The Court has reviewed the well-reasoned R&R for clear error and finds none. Thus, the Court ADOPTS the R&R in full and DENIE S Plaintiff's motion. The reference to Magistrate Judge Pitman is continued. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending motion at Dkt. 85 in this case. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 6/22/2017) Copies Sent By Chambers. (js)
|
|
Filing
76
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re: 25 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint And For Summary Judgment. filed by Patrick J Monaghan Jr, Esq. For the foregoing reasons, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Pitman&# 039;s R&R in its entirety. Accordingly, the Court (1) DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims alleging common law fraud, violation of N.Y. Judiciary Law § 487, and fraud on the court for failure to satisfy the heightened pleading requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b); (2) GRANTS summary judgment dismissing Plaintiffs legal malpractice claim to the extent the claim is predicated on (a) Monaghan's alleged failure to discover and inform Plaintiff and the courts that KBA had not been r enamed K&B and (b) Monaghan's alleged withholding of documents after Monaghan withdrew from representing Plaintiff in connection with the 2000 N.Y.S. Action; and (3) DENIES Monaghan's motion in all other respects. In light of Plaintiff� 39;s pro se status and the fact that dismissal of her common law fraud, violation of N.Y. Judiciary Law § 487, and fraud on the court claims is based on her failure to allege these claims in the proper form, Plaintiff is afforded one final op portunity to attempt to state these claims properly. Plaintiff has until April 7, 2017 to file a Second Amended Complaint. The reference to Magistrate Judge Pitman is continued. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all pending motions in this case. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 3/6/2017) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (kgo)
|
|
Filing
60
OPINION & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION re: 54 Report and Recommendation re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss by Defendant Patrick J. Monaghan, Jr. - Rules 8(a), 9(b), and 12(b)(6) Fed. R. Civ. Pro.. On July 21, 2016, Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman issued a Report & Recommendation ("R&R") that recommends denying as moot Defendant Patrick Monaghan's motion to dismiss Plaintiff Anne Bryant's initial complaint (Dkt. 19) because Bryant subsequently filed an amended complaint, which Monaghan has also moved to dismiss (Dkt. 25). No party objects. The Court adopts the R&R. The Clerk is directed to terminate the motion at Docket 19. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 8/4/2016) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (kko)
|
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.
