Razzoli v. City of New York et al
| Kevin Razzoli |
| City of New York, Nick Rodelli, Hunts Point Co-op Executive Brd, Andrew G. Celli, Ramadiz and Defendants in Official and Indiv. Capacity |
| 1:2016cv07136 |
| September 13, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Colleen McMahon |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
210
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 209 Memorandum & Opinion in favor of City of New York, Hunts Point Co-op Executive Brd, Ramadiz, Unknown Public Safety Officer N.Y.C., et al, Andrew G. Celli, Nick Rodelli against Kevin Razzoli. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated June 8, 2022, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's motion to disqualify is DENIED; accordingly, the case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 6/9/2022) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km)
|
|
Filing
209
OPINION AND ORDER re: 207 MOTION to Disqualify Counsel. filed by Kevin Razzoli. For the foregoing reasons, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the motion to disqualify is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate all outstanding motions and close the case. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/8/2022) (mml) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
159
ORDER: By letter dated March 19, 2021, pro se plaintiff requested, inter alia, that this Court bar defendants from making certain arguments and schedule a pretrial conference in the case. These requests are denied as this case remains stayed. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James L. Cott on 3/26/2021) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
|
|
Filing
157
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of pro se plaintiffs voicemail message to Chambers yesterday requesting that the Court mail a copy of its January 19, 2021 Memorandum Order to him. As requested, the Court will do so. (We had previously mailed the Mem orandum Order at the time of its issuance.) In the future, however, all communications with the Court should be in writing, not by telephone. SO ORDERED. A copy of this Order has been mailed to the following: Kevin Razzoli 114 Belmont Place Staten Island, New York 10301. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James L. Cott on 2/25/2021) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (kv)
|
|
Filing
148
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 140 Letter, filed by Kevin Razzoli, 145 MOTION for Default Judgment as to. filed by Kevin Razzoli. Accordingly, plaintiff's request to disqualify Mr. Celli and Ms. Salzman as defense counsel is denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James L. Cott on 1/19/2021) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (kv)
|
|
Filing
146
ORDER denying without prejudice to renewal 145 Motion for Default Judgment. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's application for default judgment against the City of New York is DENIED without prejudice to renewal pending the lifting of t he Stay. It is further ORDERED that Defendant's application regarding an alleged conflict of interest falls within the Order of Reference to Judge Cott. It is further ORDERED that, by January 19, 2021, Defendants shall transmit a copy of this Order to pro se Plaintiff and file proof of service. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 1/12/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
144
ORDER: WHEREAS, for all of these reasons the December 15, 2020, Order (Dkt. No. 136) is not clearly erroneous. It is hereby ORDERED, that Plaintiff's objection to the December 15, 2020 Order is overruled. Because Plaintiff's underlying c riminal case has yet to be resolved and the Stay does not violate Plaintiff's constitutional rights, it is premature to lift the Stay. It is further ORDERED, that by January 15, 2021, Defendants shall serve a copy of this Order on pro se Plaintiff. (As further sets forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 1/11/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
134
ORDER re: 133 Notice (Other) filed by Kevin Razzoli. By Order dated February 2, 2017, Judge Schofield stayed this case pending resolution of plaintiff's underlying criminal case. Dkt. No. 20. As of the most recent status update on November 25, 2020, plaintiff's appeal of his criminal conviction is still pending. Dkt. No. 132. On November 30, 2020, plaintiff filed a notice of objection to the delay of trial, alleging that the stay violates his constitutional rights. Dkt. No. 133. Defendants are directed to file a response to plaintiff's objection no later than December 14, 2020. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James L. Cott on 12/9/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (kv)
|
|
Filing
120
ORDER: By Orders dated July 10, 2019 and October 30, 2019, both Judge Schofield and I, respectively, directed the parties to report to the Court regarding the status of Mr. Razzoli's appeal of his criminal conviction. Dkt. Nos. 106, 115. By lett er dated December 2, 2019, Defendants advised the Court that they have no information about the appeal and have been unable to get an update from Mr. Razzoli himself. Dkt. No. 119. The last substantive update received by the Court regarding the appea l was by Mr. Razzoli's letter dated July 8, 2019. Dkt. No. 107. Accordingly, the parties are directed to provide a status update on January 16, 2020 and every 45 days thereafter, consistent with Judge Schofield's July 10 Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James L. Cott on 12/9/2019) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (kv)
|
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.
