Weiss v. City University of New York et al
| Faigy Rachel Weiss |
| City University of New York, The CUNY Board of Trustees, Hunter College of The City University of New York, The Silberman School of Socal Work at Hunter College, Nireata D. Seals, John Rose, Jennifer Raab and Roberta Nord |
| 1:2017cv03557 |
| May 11, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Vernon S. Broderick |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 |
| 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
237
ORDER: On February 27, 2023, I held a status conference in this action via telephone to discuss a briefing schedule for summary judgment. In accordance with my comments during the status conference, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties file any summ ary judgment opening briefs by Friday, June 2, 2023, any opposition by September 29, 2023, and any reply by November 17, 2023. The Clerk's Office is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff. SO ORDERED., ( Motions due by 6/2/2023., Responses due by 9/29/2023, Replies due by 11/17/2023.) (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 3/01/2023) (ama)
|
|
Filing
236
ORDER Following the resolution of Plaintiff's spoliation motion, the parties shall appear for a conference on February 27, 2023 at 4:30 PM via telephone using the dial in 888-363-4749 and access code 2682448 to discuss the current status of any settlement discussions and a summary judgment briefing schedule. The parties should meet and confer prior to the conference regarding a proposed summary judgment briefing schedule. SO ORDERED. (Telephone Conference set for 2/27/2023 at 04:30 PM before Judge Vernon S. Broderick.) (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 2/9/2023) (jca)
|
|
Filing
231
ORDER re: 196 Letter filed by Faigy Rachel Weiss. For the reasons explained at the conference on January 11, 2023, Plaintiff's spoliation motion (see ECF No. 196) is DENIED, given that Defendants have located and produced the applicatio n materials sought by Plaintiff. To the extent that Plaintiff now raises-for the first time-issues concerning the format of application materials previously produced by Defendants, Plaintiff's objection is untimely. The materials were produced to Plaintiff during discovery and Plaintiff's pro bono counsel never raised an objection. Therefore, Plaintiff's objection is untimely as it was made months after the close of discovery. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo on 1/12/2023) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
218
ORDER re: 217 Order on Motion for Extension of Time. In light of the briefing schedule for Plaintiff's Spoliation Motion, it is hereby ORDERED that the current briefing schedule for summary judgment is adjourned sine die. I will issue a revised briefing schedule following the resolution of Plaintiff's Spoliation Motion. The Clerk's Office is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 11/10/2022) (kv)
|
|
Filing
212
ORDER: Pursuant to the telephonic conference held before this Court on October 4, 2022, Defendants' response to Plaintiff's spoliation motion (ECF No. 196) is due no later than October 28, 2022. Any reply by Plaintiff shall be filed no later than November 7, 2022. SO ORDERED. ( Responses due by 10/28/2022, Replies due by 11/7/2022.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo on 10/4/2022) (rro)
|
|
Filing
193
ORDER granting 191 Letter Motion to Compel. Consistent with the Court's previous orders, and as described in detail at the conference, Plaintiff is directed to submit a notarized verification of her responses to Document Requests 2 and 4 b y no later than Monday, August 8, 2022. As stated at the conference: FAILURE TO SUBMIT THIS VERIFICATION BY THE DEADLINE PROVIDED MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS, INCLUDING PLAINTIFF BEING PRECLUDED FROM RELYING ON THIS INFORMATION AT TRIAL. Finally, on J une 14, 2022, this case was referred to the Court's Mediation Program (see ECF No. 186). On June 22, 2022, this Court ordered the Clerk of Court to locate pro bono counsel to represent Plaintiff in the mediation (see ECF No. 189). However, gi ven that the Mediation Office may be unable to locate pro bono counsel for Plaintiff, the parties are directed to move forward with scheduling a mediation. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at ECF No. 191. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo on 7/26/2022) (rro)
|
|
Filing
189
ORDER REGARDING PRO BONO MEDIATION COUNSEL: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall locate pro bono counsel to represent the plaintiff at the mediation. The time to assign a mediator under Local Rule 83.9 and the Courts Mediation Progr am Procedures will be deferred until pro bono counsel has filed a Notice of Limited Appearance of Pro Bono Counsel. Pro bono counsel will represent the plaintiff solely for purposes of the mediation, and that representation will terminate at the c onclusion of the mediation process. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any objection by the plaintiff to the appointment of pro bono counsel to represent the plaintiff in the mediation must be filed within 14 days of this order. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo on 6/17/2022) (rro)
|
|
Filing
187
ORDER granting 181 Letter Motion to Compel. Application Granted. Plaintiff is directed to comply with the Court's Order dated May 20, 2022 (ECF No. 178) no later than June 30, 2022. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at ECF No. 181. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo on 6/13/2022) (rro)
|
|
Filing
178
ORDER granting 171 Letter Motion to Compel. Defendant's motion to compel is granted, Plaintiff is ordered to either produce the documents that are responsive to Document Requests 2 and 4, served by Defendant following Plaintiff's depos ition or to verify her responses to those requests. With regard to Plaintiff's argument raised in her May 4, 2022 letter (see ECF No. 173)--that Defendant was not required to verify certain responses previously provided in a list format to P laintiff and thus Plaintiff should not be required to verify her recent responses to Defendant's requests--the Court finds the argument unpersuasive. Plaintiff was represented by able counsel at the time Defendant served its responses to Pla intiff's document requests, and counsel did not object to the form in which Defendant provided its responses. Moreover, discovery in this case closed on March 18, 2022. See 4/7 /22 Order, ECF No 170. Discovery remained opened after March 18 th only for the limited purpose of resolving the instant dispute over Defendant's document requests. See id. As such, Plaintiff cannot now raise new complaints about discovery that Defendant previously provided and for which Plaintiff never previously objected. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo on 5/20/2022) (tg)
|
|
Filing
172
ORDER SCHEDULING DISCOVERY CONFERENCE, A telephonic Discovery Conference in this matter is hereby scheduled for Thursday, May 12, 2022, at 3:30 p.m. Counsel for the parties are directed to call Judge Figueredo's AT&T conference line at the scheduled time. Please dial (888) 808-6929; access code 9781335 . SO ORDERED. ( Telephone Conference set for 5/12/2022 at 03:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo on 5/3/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
143
ORDER AND NOTICE OF INITIAL CONFERENCE: This case has been assigned to me for all purposes. It is hereby: ORDERED that, in light of the public health crisis, the Court will not be holding an initial pretrial conference. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, b y October 22, 2021, the parties submit a joint letter,not to exceed three (3) pages, providing the following information in separate paragraphs: As set forth herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties also jointly submit to the Court a proposed c ase management plan and scheduling order. A template for the order is available at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judge/Broderick. The status letter and the proposed case management plan should be filed electronically on ECF, consistent with Section 13.1 of the Court's Electronic Case Filing (ECF) Rules & Instructions. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 9/29/2021) (ama)
|
|
Filing
134
ORDER: On November 2, 2020, I granted the parties' request to adjourn the remaining discovery deadlines pending resolution of Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's second amended complaint. (Doc. 130.) It is hereby: ORDERED that the hearing scheduling in this matter for February 19, 2021 at 2:30 p.m. is adjourned. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 2/16/2021) (nb)
|
|
Filing
119
CONFIDENTIALITY STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material...SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 4/14/2020) (rro)
|
|
Filing
100
OPINION & ORDER re: 78 SECOND MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint (superseding ECF Doc. 77) filed by Members of the City University of New York Board of Trustees, Roberta Nord, Nireata D. Seals, Jennifer Raab, MEMBERS OF THE CIT Y UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK BOARD OF TRUSTEES. For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction is DENIED. Her request to disqualify the Attorney General's Office from representing Defendants is also DENIED. Defe ndants' request to dismiss Plaintiff's previously dismissed claims is GRANTED. The following claims remain in the Second Amended Complaint: (1) Title VI claim against CUNY; (2) § 1983 claims against the CUNY Board of Trustees, Milliken , Seals, Rose, Raab, and Nord in their individual capacities; (3) § 1981 claims against the CUNY Board of Trustees, Milliken, Seals, Rose, Raab, and Nord in their individual capacities; and (4) Plaintiff's claim against Letitia James, Attor ney General of New York, in her official and individual capacity.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's June 20, 2019 motion to dismiss, (Doc. 78), is denied as moot. Defendants are directed to file their anticipated motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint by December 6, 2019. Plaintiff's opposition shall be due by February 4, 2020. Defendant's reply shall be due by March 5, 2020. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at Document 78. SO ORDERED. (Motions due by 12/6/2019., Responses due by 2/4/2020, Replies due by 3/5/2020.) (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 11/10/2019) (rro)
|
|
Filing
65
OPINION & ORDER re: 36 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by Roberta Nord, Nireata D. Seals, Jennifer Raab, John Rose, City University of New York, 47 MOTION to Dismiss 8/9/2018 Notice of Motion to Dismiss the Am ended Complaint on behalf of Defendants Members of the CUNY Board of Trustees, Eric T. Schneiderman and Barbara D. Underwood [In Further Support of ECF # 37, Banks Declaration & filed by Members of the City University of New York Board of Trustees, Eric T. Schneiderman, MEMBERS OF THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK BOARD OF TRUSTEES. For the reasons stated herein, Defendants' motion to dismiss, (Doc. 36), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Specifically, all of Plaintiff's claims a re dismissed except the following claims: (1) Title VI claim against CUNY; (2) § 1983 claims against the CUNY Board of Trustees, Milliken, Seals, Rose, Raab, and Nord in their individual capacities; and (3) § 1981 claims against the CUNY Bo ard of Trustees, Milliken, Seals, Rose, Raab, and Nord in their individual capacities. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the open motions at Doc. Nos. 36 and 47 and mail a copy of this Opinion and Order to the pro se Plaintiff. Defendants shall file an Answer to the Amended Complaint within twenty-one days of the date of this Opinion and Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 3/18/2019) (anc) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
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.
