Ravina v. Columbia University
||March 22, 2016
||US District Court for the Southern District of New York
||Foley Square Office
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|March 31, 2019
OPINION AND ORDER re: 295 LETTER MOTION to Seal Document Proposed Search Terms addressed to Judge Ronnie Abrams from Andrew Melzer dated 10/26/2018 filed by Enrichetta Ravina, 274 MOTION for Permanent Injunction filed by Enrichetta Ravina, 297 LETTER MOTION for Leave to File Response to arguments Plaintiff raised for the first time in her Reply brief in support of her motion for injunctive relief (Dkt.293) addressed to Judge Ronnie Abrams from Be ttina B. Plevan dated 11/7/18 filed by Columbia University, 281 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law or, in the alternative, remittitur filed by Geert Bekaert. For the foregoing reasons, Bekaert's motion for judgment as a matt er of law and Ravina's motion for injunctive relief, as well as her sealing request, are denied. Bekaert's motion for a remittitur of the damages awards is granted. No later than April 22, 2019, Ravina shall inform the Court in writin g whether she will accept the reduced damages awards of $500,000 in compensatory damages and $250,000 in punitive damages. If she does not, the Court will grant Bekaert a new trial on the sole issue of damages. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions pending at docket entries 274,281,295, and 297. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 3/31/2019) (ne)
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
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?