Viruet v. City Of New York et al
| Shanet Viruet |
| City Of New York and New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings |
| 1:2016cv08327 |
| October 25, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| John G. Koeltl |
| Employment |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| 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
159
ORDER: Therefore, for all of the reasons the Court previously explained in its Memorandum Opinion and Order dated July 31, 2010, when it adopted the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge dated May 1, 2020, the plaintiff's action is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rules 37(b) and 4l(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the defendants' request for attorney's fees and costs is denied. To the extent that the Clerk's Judgment dated July 31, 2020, d ismissing this case may have been suspended in view of this Court's Order granting reconsideration, that Judgment is now reinstated. A copy of this Order will be mailed to the plaintiff. Copy mailed to prose party(ies) at docket address. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/14/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ks)
|
|
Filing
156
ORDER: The plaintiff complains that she submitted a fifth request for an extension of time to file Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated May 1, 2020, but the Court failed to act on that request before adopting the Report and Recommendation. The plaintiff therefore asks that the Court grant reconsideration of its ruling adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(a) and 60 because the Court wa s under the impression that the plaintiff had failed to file any objections. In fact, as the defendants concede in opposing the motion for reconsideration, the plaintiff did file a request for a fifth extension of the time to file objections, but did so at 11:29 p.m., on the last day to file objections. The plaintiff had no right to expect that a fifth extension would be granted, and the filing of a request for an extension of time did not toll the time to file objections. Moreover, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's application for reconsideration contains misstatements, and, like other submissions by the plaintiff, was sent to the Court by email but sent to counsel for the defendants by regular m ail-a practice that results in a delay in the defendants' ability to respond to the plaintiff's numerous applications; as further set forth herein. The plaintiff's time to file objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Parker is extended to September 18, 2020. The Court notes that the plaintiff will have had four and half months to file Objections to the Report and Recommendation and no further extensions will be granted. Indeed, the plai ntiff should have been prepared to file her objections before now. Therefore, the plaintiff should take care to assure that any objections are timely filed and that she serves a copy on defense counsel by email when they are filed. The time for the defendants to respond to any objections is October 10, 2020. The time for any reply is October 12, 2020. The Court notes that, although a notice of appeal has been filed, this Court retains jurisdiction to decide a motion for reconsider ation. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4). The Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to the pro se plaintiff at 90 Washington Street #24C, New York, NY 10006. ( Objections to R&R due by 9/18/2020) (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 9/2/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
151
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Therefore, for the reasons stated herein, and in the Report and Recommendation, the plaintiffs action is dismissed with prejudice, but without any imposition of costs or attorneys fees. The Clerk is directed to ente r Judgment dismissing this action with prejudice. The Clerk is also directed to close this case and to close all pending motions. Chambers will mail a copy of this Opinion to the pro se plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 7/31/2020) (jca) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
147
ORDER: The Court has received the attached letter. The time to file objections is extended to June 8, 2020. The time to respond is June 29, 2020. The time to reply is July 10, 2020. Chambers will e-mail a copy of this order to the pro se plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/18/2020) (ks)
|
|
Filing
143
ORDER: The status conference and oral argument scheduled for March 31, 2020 at 4:00 p.m. is hereby converted to a telephone conference. The parties should dial the following number: (866) 434-5269. The access code is: 4858267 (if prompted to put in security code, re-enter access code). Defendant is directed to email a copy of this order to Plaintiff. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 3/16/2020) (kv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
136
ORDER: Although the Court has repeatedly warned Plaintiff-who is an attorney-that she may be sanctioned for failing to comply with its orders, it has, nevertheless, given Plaintiff opportunity after opportunity to comply. Clearly, Plaintif f has interpreted this Court's restraint as a signal that she will not be sanctioned, even if she continues to flout this Court's orders. Plaintiff is incorrect. The Court will grant Plaintiff one final opportunity to provide three dates when she is available for her deposition (before April 30, 2020) and to provide Defendants' counsel with HIPAA releases. Plaintiff must provide Defendant's counsel with the dates when she will be available for her depositio n, her HIPAA authorizations, and document requests and interrogatories by no later than March 6, 2020. Failure to comply will result in sanctions, which may include a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Defendants' counsel is i nstructed to file a letter on ECF by no later than March 9, 2020 advising the Court whether Plaintiff has provided: the dates when she will be available for her deposition; HIPAA authorizations; interrogatories; and document requests. If Plaintiff fails to provide such information to Defendants, Defendants may file a motion seeking sanctions. Such motion shall be due by March 16, 2020, and Defendants are also instructed to serve the motion on Plaintiff via email. Plaintif f may file an opposition brief by no later than March 30, 2020 with a courtesy copy submitted via email to: Parker_NYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff must also serve her brief on Defendants' counsel via email by no later than March 30, 2020. There will be no reply and no extensions of time will be granted. If filed, the Court will hear argument on the sanctions motion during the previously scheduled status conference on March 31, 2020 at 4:00 p.m. Defendants are directed to send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff via email. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this order to the Plaintiff. ( Motions due by 3/16/2020., Responses due by 3/30/2020, Oral Argument set for 3/31/2020 at 04:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 3/2/2020) (mro) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
133
ORDER: The Court held a status conference on February 19, 2020. Plaintiff arrived 15 minutes late to the conference, which was scheduled to begin promptly at 3:30 p.m. Plaintiff is directed to plan ahead to arrive on time for court conference s. Failure to comply with Court orders and late arrivals may result in sanctions. Plaintiff must make herself available for her deposition before the close of fact discovery on April 30, 2020. To the extent Plaintiff wishes to take depositions, she is directed to serve deposition notices by no later than March 6, 2020. The next status conference is scheduled for March 31, 2020 at 4:00 p.m. in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. The parties are directed to file a joint st atus letter one week before the conference, on March 24, 2020, identifying any issues the parties wish to raise with the Court. For other discovery rulings and directions, the parties are directed to the transcript of the conference. The Clerk of C ourt is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. As further set forth herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 2/20/2020) ( Fact Discovery due by 4/30/2020., Status Conference set for 3/31/2020 at 04:00 PM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
131
ORDER: In light of Plaintiff's letter at Docket Number 129, the Court hereby instructs the parties to exchange discovery requests and documents via both email and regular mail. If she has not done so already, Plaintiff is hereby directed to email her initial disclosures to Defendants by no later than February 14, 2020. As previously held by this Court, Plaintiff will not be permitted to amend her Complaint. (Doc. No. 119.) As such, the only remaining claims in this action are those that survived Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (See Doc. No. 98.) The Court expects the parties to meet and confer throughout the discovery process, both in compliance with this Court's orders and with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1, which requires the Court and the parties to construe, administer, and employ the Federal Rules in a manner that ensures the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding." The parties are directed to meet and confer before the February 19, 2020 status conference. The parties should come to the conference prepared to provide the Court with a detailed update regarding discovery, including the types of documents the parties will be seeking, the names of t he individuals who will be deposed, and the dates of those depositions. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to the Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 2/7/2020) (ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
128
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff's doctor's note. At Plaintiff's request, an unredacted copy of the note will not be filed on ECF. Instead, the note will be filed under seal. The Court is also in receipt of the parties&# 039; status letter describing the current status of discovery. On October 29, 2019, this Court set a deadline of April 30, 2020 for the completion of all discovery. The Court will not extend this deadline absent good cause. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this order to the Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 2/4/2020) (ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
119
ORDER: Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to submit her proposed third amended complaint ("TAC") at Docket Number 118 is DENIED. Plaintiff shallrefrain from sending any documents directly to chambers. Unless otherwise in structed by the Court, Plaintiff is directed to file all documents on the docket through the Pro Se Intake Unit. Plaintiff is hereby warned that the Court will not consider any future applications that are not filed on the docket. Plaintiff is also instructed to direct all discovery and case management requests to Judge Parker, who is supervising the case for all pre-trial purposes. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to the Pro Se Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 12/3/2019) (ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
98
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: re: 20 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by City Of New York, New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings, 73 MOTION to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint filed by Lorelei Salas, Sanfor d Cohen, City Of New York, Maureen Brooks, Fidel Del Valle, Bill De Blasio, Julie Menin, Michael Tiger, Manuel Menjivar, Tamala Boyd, New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings, Jordan Cohen, Matilda Sarpong, Robert Flynn, 77 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Saul Fishman, Local 237 Brotherhood of Teamsters, Civil Service Bar Association. For the reasons explained above, the union defendants' motion to dismiss is granted. The municipal defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. It is denied with respect to the plaintiff's NYCHRL disability-discrimination claim against the City of New York and Matilda Sarpong and her disability-related retaliation claim against the City of New York an d Matilda Sarpong. The municipal defendants' motion to dismiss is granted with respect to all other claims. The plaintiff's request for sanctions is denied. The Court has considered all the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed, the arguments are either moot or without merit. The Clerk is directed to close Docket Numbers 20, 73, and 77. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/03/2019) (ama)
|
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.
