Snead v. Lobianco et al
| Lisa Snead |
| Gregory Lobianco, City of New York and John and Jane Doe 1 through 10 |
| 1:2016cv09528 |
| December 9, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Alison J. Nathan |
| 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
193
ORDER denying 192 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. It is hereby ORDERED that April 18 request is denied. There are no outstanding deadlines or appearances except for the trial itself. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should the parties wi sh to proceed to trial in this matter, that trial will occur on April 28 and not thereafter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should the parties wish to file a stipulation of dismissal instead of proceeding to trial, they shall do so promptly. Any de lay will unfairly burden the Clerk of Court and citizens called for jury duty. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event no stipulation of dismissal is filed and the parties fail to appear for trial on April 28, the complaint shall be dismissed for failure to prosecute. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 4/19/2022) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
190
ORDER: Having been informed by the Mediation Office that this case has been settled, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties are directed to file a stipulation of voluntary dismissal by April 22, 2022. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 4/15/2022) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
189
ORDER terminating 162 Motion in Limine. The Court held a final pretrial conference on March 9, 2022. It is hereby ORDERED that the defendants' motion in limine of August 20, 2021 is resolved in the manner stated on the record at the March 9 conference. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 3/9/2022) (tg)
|
|
Filing
182
ORDER: ORDERED that the parties shall consult and advise the Court by February 8, 2022 whether, should this case proceed to trial, all parties consent to a bench trial before this Court. Should there be a division of views among the parties, no one shall on any account advise the Court which party or parties has elected to proceed to trial before a jury. Should the parties decide to proceed to trial before a jury, this Court will advise the Clerk of Court that this case is ready for trial durin g the period April to June 2022. The Court will attempt to give the parties as much notice as possible of the date the jury trial will begin. The parties must be prepared to proceed to trial before a jury as soon as a jury can be impaneled in their case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall consult and advise the Court by February 8, 2022 whether all parties consent to have this case proceed to trial before a Magistrate Judgerather than before this Court. Should the parties elect to pr oceed before a Magistrate Judge, they should complete the attached Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge and submit it to the Clerk of Court. Should there be a division of views among the parties, no one shall on any account advise the Court which party or parties were willing to proceed to trial before a Magistrate Judge. If all parties consent to trial before the Magistrate Judge, that trial may be conducted at the parties' election either as a jury tria l or a bench trial. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should the parties elect to proceed to trial before a jury (whether before this Court or a Magistrate Judge) they must advise the Court by February 8, 2022 of the following: As set forth herein. IT IS F URTHER ORDERED that, should the parties consent to a bench trial before this Court, they will consult and advise the Court by February 8, 2022, of three Mondays during the period April to June 2022 when they are prepared to begin that trial. The Cour t will attempt to accommodate the parties' choice of dates and give them notice by March 4, 2022 of the date of the trial. The Court will also schedule a conference with the parties to discuss how much of the bench trial may proceed remotely. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 1/20/2022) (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Consent Form) (ama)
|
|
Filing
179
ORDER: This case having been transferred to my docket on December 10, 2021, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall provide 2 courtesy copies of their pretrial filings including their motions in limine and their proposed joint pretrial order to Chambers no later than January 7, 2022. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 12/21/2021) (ate)
|
|
Filing
176
ORDER: The Court previously granted Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file her response to Defendants' motion in limine for a date to be set once the rescheduled trial date was determined. Dkt. No. 171. The Court now order s Plaintiff to file her response to Defendants' motion in limine by March 1, 2022. SO ORDERED. ( Responses due by 3/1/2022) (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/13/2021) (vfr) Modified on 10/13/2021 (vfr). (Main Document 176 replaced on 10/13/2021) (vfr). Modified on 10/13/2021 (vfr).
|
|
Filing
175
ORDER: The Court has set a tentative date for trial in this case on April 26, 2022. IT IS ORDERED that a final pretrial conference will occur on April 15, 2022 at 2:00 P.M. in Room 906 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York 10007. (Final Pretrial Conference set for 4/15/2022 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 906, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Alison J. Nathan.) (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/12/2021) (rro)
|
|
Filing
174
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of the parties' proposed trial dates. The Court will accordingly request April 26, 2022 in accordance with the Southern District of New York's COVID rules for centralized jury scheduling. The Court will inform the parties as soon as the trial date is assigned through the District's centralized calendaring system. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/6/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
172
ORDER: The Court ordered the parties to file a joint letter by September 24, 2021 with potential trial dates beginning in March 2022 (Dkt. No. 169), and the Court has not yet received that letter. The parties are directed to submit a joint letter providing those dates by Monday, October 4, 2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 9/28/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
169
ORDER re: 168 Status Report filed by Gregory Lobianco, Richard Hanson, City of New York, Asa Barnes. The Court has received the parties' joint letter regarding the upcoming trial date. Dkt. No. 168. In light of the Defendants' request and the unlikelihood that trial will proceed on October 27, 2021, the Court will adjourn the trial until 2022. The parties are instructed to meet and confer and submit a joint letter by September 24, 2021 with potential trial dates beginning in March 2022. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 9/9/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
167
ORDER: As the Court explained in its June 23, 2021 Order, see Dkt. No. 154, the Southern District of New York has adopted a centralized calendaring system for jury trials during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under the system currently in place, the Cler k's Office schedules up to three jury trials to begin on each day of jury selection: a primary case and up to two back-up cases that may proceed in its place if the primary case does not go forward. The Clerk's Office also schedules up t o four cases for each week as "trial ready." These cases may proceed if both the primary and backup cases for one of the days during the week do not go forward. At the parties' request, the Court set a tentative trial date in this m atter for October 25, 2021. Dkt. No. 154. The Court accordingly requested a jury trial for that date. The Clerk's Office has now notified the Court that this case has been scheduled as the secondary back-up case for October 27, 2021. That me ans the case will proceed if the primary case and primary back-up case scheduled for that day do not go forward. The parties must therefore be trial ready for that date. As soon as the Court confirms whether the matter will proceed during the wee k of October 27, 2021, it will inform the parties. If the case cannot proceed during the week of October 27, 2021, the Court will seek another jury trial date for as soon as possible thereafter. Within one week of this Order, the parties should f ile a joint letter informing the Court of whether they wish to remain as a secondary back-up case for October 27, 2021. If not, the parties should propose trial dates starting in February 2022. SO ORDERED. ( Ready for Trial by 10/27/2021.) (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 8/30/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
156
ORDER: The Court's June 23, 2021 Order, Dkt. No. 154, erroneously stated that the Court would request a jury for November 8, 2021. The Court will request a jury for October 25, 2021, which is the tentative date for trial in this matter. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 7/18/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
154
ORDER: The Court has set a tentative date for trial in this case on October 25, 2021. The Southern District of New York has reconfigured courtrooms and other spaces in its courthouses to allow jury trials to proceed as safely as possible during t he COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the protocols implemented in response to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Southern District is scheduling all jury trials through a centralized calendaring process, giving priority to criminal trials. Though the Court will make every effort to try the case at the currently scheduled date, it cannot guarantee that a jury trial in this matter will be able to proceed as scheduled. Accordingly, the parties are hereby ORDERED to meet and confer and submit a joint letter by July 14, 2021, informing the Court of whether, in the event that this case proceeds to trial, all parties consent to a bench trial before this Court? If either party does not consent to a bench trial, the parties shall ad vise the Court that they do not consent, but without disclosing the identity of the party or parties who do not consent. The parties are free to withhold consent without negative consequences. If the parties do not consent to a bench trial, the Co urt will request a jury for November 8, 2021, consistent with the protocols implemented by the Southern District. In that event, the parties shall be prepared to proceed to trial as of that date and on each following week through December 2021. Th e Court will provide the parties as much notice as possible about whether their case will proceed to trial during any of those weeks. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a final pretrial conference will occur on October 15, 2021 at 2:00 P.M. SO ORDERED. ( Final Pretrial Conference set for 10/15/2021 at 02:00 PM before Judge Alison J. Nathan.) (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 6/22/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
151
ORDER. The Court has received the parties' joint letter requesting a trial date and proposed schedule for pretrial submissions. Due to the backlog of jury trials in the Southern District due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Court is unable to sche dule a jury trial during the dates suggested by the parties. The parties should select one of the following weeks for trial: September 27th, October 4, October 11, or October 25, or November 1. The parties should then propose another schedule for pretrial submissions that is in line with that date. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 3/24/2021) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
149
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. For the reasons explained above, Defendants' motion for reconsideration is DENIED. This resolves Dkt. No. 145. So ordered. re: 145 LETTER MOTION for Conference, Motion for Reconsideration of Summary Judgment Order addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Hannah V. Faddis dated June 11, 2020. Document filed by Asa Barnes, City of New York, Richard Hanson, Gregory Lobianco. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 3/8/2021) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
144
OPINION AND ORDER. For the reasons above, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment. And the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment. This resolves Dkt. Nos. 125 and 129 . The following of Snead's claims survive summary judgment: (1) fabrication of evidence against all Defendants except Hanson and Barnes; (2) unlawful search against all Defendants, (3) unlawful stop against all Defendants, (4) false arrest again st all Defendants, (5) failure to intervene against all Defendants, (6) malicious prosecution against all Defendants except Hanson, and (7) supervisory liability against all Defendants. No later than two weeks from the date of this Opinion, the parti es shall submit a joint letter proposing trial dates and a briefing schedule for the pretrial materials described in Rule 6 of the Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases. The parties shall also provide the Court with an estimated length of trial. SO ORDERED. re: 129 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Gregory Lobianco, Richard Hanson, City of New York, Asa Barnes, 125 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Lisa Snead. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 5/28/2020) (rjm)
|
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.
