Weiss v. Macy's Retail Holdings Inc.
| David Weiss |
| Macy's Retail Holdings Inc. |
| 1:2016cv07660 |
| September 29, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Westchester |
| Alvin K. Hellerstein |
| Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| 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
118
ORDER granting 117 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. Trial is adjourned to February 24, 2020 at 10 a.m. Jury Trial set for 2/24/2020 at 10:00 AM before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 12/23/2019) (ne)
|
|
Filing
116
ORDER: The trial previously scheduled for December 16, 2019 is hereby adjourned to January 21, 2020 at the United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York 10007, in Courtroom 14D. (Jury Trial set for 1/21/2020 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 14D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 12/12/2019) (cf)
|
|
Filing
100
OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO ALLOW EXPERT TESTIMONY re: 90 MOTION to Allow Expert Testimony filed by Macy's Retail Holdings Inc. For the reasons stated herein, defendant's motion to allow expert testimony is granted. Any ruling I expressed previously, orally or in writing, that is inconsistent with this ruling is vacated. The Clerk shall terminate the motion (ECF No. 90). (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 11/19/2019) (mro)
|
|
Filing
39
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION re: 13 MOTION to Compel Arbitration and Stay Civil Proceedings, filed by Macy's Retail Holdings Inc. Macy's gave its employees full control over whet her they wanted to agree to arbitrate employment-related disputes. Macy's then attempted to convert the silence and inaction of its employees into acceptance of its offer to arbitrate by purporting to attach that effect to their silence. New Y ork contract law does not permit this. See Anderson Trading, 298 N. Y. at 440. For the reasons stated herein, defendant's motion is denied. The Clerk shall terminate the motion (Dkt. No. 13). The parties shall appear for a status conference on July 28, 2017 at 10:00 a.m., and shall present the Court with a proposed case management plan. (Status Conference set for 7/28/2017 at 10:00 AM before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.) (ras)
|
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
| Search for this case: Weiss v. Macy's Retail Holdings Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: David Weiss | |
| Represented By: | Colleen Margaret Meenan |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Macy's Retail Holdings Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Steven Gerber |
| Represented By: | Christopher Michael McFadden |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
