Uzhca et al v. Walmart Stores Inc. et al
| Luis Uzhca and Maria Smith |
| Wal-mart Stores Inc., Sam's East Inc. and Inland-Greenburg Delaware Business Trust |
| 1:2017cv03850 |
| May 22, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Nelson Stephen Roman |
| Other Personal Injury |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
213
ORDER: The Court having been advised that all claims asserted herein have been settled, it is ORDERED, that the above-entitled action be and hereby is discontinued, without costs to either party, subject to reopening should the settlement not be consummated within sixty (60) days of the date hereof. The parties are advised that if they wish the Court to retain jurisdiction in this matter for purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court within the next 60 days with a request that the agreement be "so ordered" by the Court. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 5/8/2024) (ate)
|
|
Filing
204
OPINION & ORDER re: 169 MOTION in Limine to preclude testimony from Scott Haig. filed by Maria Smith, Luis Uzhca, 166 MOTION in Limine to Preclude Testimony of Plaintiffs' Alleged Medical Experts and for Other Relief . filed by Wal-mart Stores Inc., Sam's East Inc., 168 MOTION in Limine to preclude testimony from Christopher Ferrone. filed by Maria Smith, Luis Uzhca, 164 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Any Reference to Securemen t of the Load. filed by Wal-mart Stores Inc., Sam's East Inc., 167 MOTION in Limine Omnibus. filed by Maria Smith, Luis Uzhca, 195 MOTION for Sanctions . filed by Wal-mart Stores Inc., Sam's East Inc ., 165 MOTION in Limine to Preclude Plaintiffs from Offering Certain Evidence and for Related Relief. filed by Wal-mart Stores Inc., Sam's East Inc. For the foregoing reasons, the Court resolves the parties' motions a s follows: (1) Defendants' motion at ECF No. 164 is DENIED; (2) Defendants' motion at ECF No. 165 is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART; (3) Defendants' motion at ECF No. 166 is DENIED; (4) Plaintiffs' motion at ECF No. 167 is GRANT ED IN PART, DENIED IN PART; (5) Plaintiffs' motion at ECF No. 168 is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART; (6) Plaintiffs' motion at ECF No. 169 is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART; and (7) Defendants' motion at ECF No. 195 is GRANTED IN PA RT, DENIED IN PART. The parties are directed to appear in person before this Court for a pretrial conference on May 3, 2023 at 11:00 AM. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, and 195. ( Pretrial Conference set for 5/3/2023 at 11:00 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 3/15/2023) (ate)
|
|
Filing
203
ORDER granting 202 Letter Motion to Seal. The Court has reviewed ECF No. 200-1 and confirmed that the document contains personal identifiers. Pltfs' request to seal ECF No. 200-1 is GRANTED. The Court respectfully directs the Clerk of C ourt to place ECF No. 200-1 under seal, accessible only to the Court and the parties to the case. The Clerk of Court is also respectfully requested to terminate the motion at ECF NO. 202. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 2/21/2023) (ate)
|
|
Filing
191
ORDER terminating 184 Letter Motion for Discovery. The Court is in receipt of the attached letter from the Defendants, dated September 12, 2022, and the response letters from the Plaintiff, dated September 12, 2022 and September 13, 2022. In light of Plaintiff's late exchange of information regarding a subsequent action that affects Plaintiff's injuries in this matter, the failure to timely disclose the information to defense counsel, and defense counsel's need for addit ional time to conduct certain discovery, depose the Plaintiff and Dr. Radna (Plaintiff's expert), and obtain additional medical records, the Court determines that the parties are not ready for trial, currently scheduled on October 12, 2022. The trial is adjourned sine die. The Clerk of the Court is kindly directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 184. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 9/16/2022) (ate)
|
|
Filing
151
ORDER denying 150 Letter Motion for Discovery. Plaintiffs' application to modify Judge McCarthy's May 24, 2021 Order on the basis that this Court intended to fully reopen discovery for general purposes is denied. This matter was refe rred to Judge McCarthy for the purpose of deciding outstanding discovery disputes. To the extent Plaintiffs are requesting this Court to reconsider or review Judge McCarthy's rulings, Plaintiffs must provide a copy of the transcript of Judge McCarthy's rulings. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 50. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 9/7/2021) (rj)
|
|
Filing
71
OPINION & ORDER re: 63 MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by Sam's East Inc. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Moving Defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing Plaintiffs claim on this basis. For the foregoing rea sons, Moving Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED. The parties are directed to appear for a pretrial conference on October 22, 2020 at 11:30 am. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at ECF No. 63., Pretrial Conference set for 10/22/2020 at 11:30 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 9/14/2020) (rj)
|
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.
