Campbell v. Chadbourne & Parke LLP
||Chadbourne & Parke LLP
||August 31, 2016
||US District Court for the Southern District of New York
||Foley Square Office
||J. Paul Oetken
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|June 14, 2017
OPINION AND ORDER re: 63 MOTION to Certify Class Conditionally and Authorization of Notice filed by Jaroslawa Z Johnson, Kerrie Campbell, 29 MOTION to Dismiss. MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Lawrence Rosenberg, Chadbourne & Parke LLP, Paul Weber, Abbe Lowell, Howard Seife, Andrew Giaccia, Marc Alpert, 41 MOTION to Dismiss Counterclaim and for Related Relief filed by Kerrie Campbell. For the foregoing reasons, the motio n for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice to renewal after limited discovery on the Clackamas factors has been completed. The related motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' class and collective action claims is DENIED. Defendants may rais e these arguments in opposition to any future motion for class certification. The motion to dismiss the counterclaim against Plaintiff Kerrie Campbell is also DENIED. Campbell's additional request for leave to amend to is DENIED, without pr ejudice to renewal. Finally, the motion for conditional certification of an Equal Pay Act collective action is DENIED, without prejudice to renewal following limited discovery. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at Docket Number 29, Docket Number 41, and Docket Number 63. (As further set forth in this Opinion and Order.) (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 6/14/2017) (mro)
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?