Lenahan v. New York City et al
| Thomas Lenahan |
| New York City, N.Y.C. Department of Correction, N.Y.C. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Ponte, Turhan Gumusdere, Barnes, Kelly, Saint Fleur, Bell, Plaskett, Nelson, Henry, Gil, Curant, Motsife, Hewitt, Black, C.O. Jane Doe, C.O. John Doe, Elizabeth Landon, A. Bilacdi, Lawrence Bell, Eric Rosen and Parkers |
| 1:2017cv06734 |
| September 1, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Unassigned |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1932 |
| None |
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
148
ORDER: The Court has been advised that all claims asserted herein have been settled in principle. ECF No. 146. Accordingly, the above-entitled action is hereby dismissed and discontinued without costs, and without prejudice to the right to reopen th e action within thirty days of the date of this Order if the settlement is not consummated. Any application to reopen must be filed within thirty days of this Order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. F urther, if the parties wish for the Court to retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court within the same thirty-day period to be so-ordered by the Court. Per Rul e IV(C) of the Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases, the Court will not retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement unless it is made part of the public record. Any pending motions are moot. All conferences are vacated. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 10/14/2022) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
139
ORDER: A settlement conference in this matter is scheduled for August 24, 2022 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom 228, United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York. Parties must attend in-person with their counsel, except Mr. Lenahan, who may attend remotely via video or telephone if he cannot be physically produced for court. The person with decision making authority to settle the matter for each party must attend the conference or be accessible by phone or other means during the conference. The parties are instructed to prepare pre-conference submissions in accordance with Judge Willis's Individual Practices. Pre-conference submissions must be received by the Court no later than August 17, 2022. SO ORDERED. ( Settlement Conference set for 8/24/2022 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 228, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Jennifer E Willis.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer E Willis on 7/15/2022) (tg)
|
|
Filing
132
ORDER terminating 130 Letter Motion for Discovery. The parties shall file a joint letter by May 25, 2022 detailing their settlement discussion progress. If they would like the Court's assistance, the parties shall contact Courtroom Deputy Christopher Davis via e-mail at WillisNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov and provide three mutually agreeable dates for a settlement conference. Proposed dates should be at least a month and a half from the date of the conference request . Fact discovery will reopen in a limited capacity on May 25, 2022, such that Plaintiff can request from Defendants (1) the log book from AKC Dorm 2 Top dated September 24, 2014; (2) Plaintiff's medication administration charts da ted September 17, 2014 through December 30, 2014; and (3) inventories of Dorm 2 Top "Clothes Box" dated September 17, 2014 through November 27, 2014. Plaintiff may also serve third party subpoenas and obtain an expert report. Defendant s may depose Plaintiff again to cover newly acquired information from the reopening of discovery. Fact discovery will conclude on June 24, 2022 and expert discovery will conclude on August 8, 2022. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer E Willis on 4/25/2022) (tg)
|
|
Filing
123
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: The Court concludes that Mr. Lenahan's objection to Defendants' failure to respond to these discovery requests is moot. It therefore does not overrule Judge Fox's Memorandum and Order on this basis. Mr. Lenahan also objects on the basis that Judge Fox misconstrued his sanctions motions as concerning only documents at GMDC, not at AMKC. Objections at 2. The Court concludes that Judge Fox did not clearly err. Judge Fox's Memorandum and Orde r repeatedly references Mr. Lenahan's document requests for both AMKC and GMDC, e.g., Sanctions Op. at 3, 910, and carefully considered whether the documents denied to Mr. Lenahan justified a sanction of drawing all factual allegations in Mr. Lenahan's favor, as requested, id. at 12. Judge Fox instead concluded that the lesser sanction of ordering that Defendants comply with Mr. Lenahan's second round of requests was adequate. Id. at 13. This Court does not find such reasoni ng to be clearly erroneous. Separate from objecting to any legal conclusion in Judge Fox's December 1 Memorandum and Order, Mr. Lenahan raises two other issues. First, he argues that through discovery he has identified "another cause of action" arising from Defendants' failure to provide him a proper mattress recommended by medical personnel, which resulted in Mr. Lenahan suffering severe nerve pain. Objections at 68. If Mr. Lenahan wishes to recover on this claim, he may seek to amend his complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, which permits amendment either by "the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave," which should be freely given "when justice so requ ires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Second, Mr. Lenahan renews his request for counsel. Objections at 9. Judge Fox has twice ordered that Mr. Lenahan be placed on the list for pro bono counsel. Dkt. Nos. 49, 97, as further set forth herein. Th is Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, so in forma pauperis status is denied. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 44445 (1962). The Clerk's offi ce is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Mr. Lenahan and note the mailing on the public docket. (As further set forth in this Order.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 11/9/2021) (vfr) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
122
ORDER re: 120 Affidavit in Support filed by Thomas K. Lenahan. On August 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed an affidavit in support of motions to compel discovery and for sanctions, which the Court construes as objections to Judge Fox's Order date d July 21, 2021. Dkt. No. 121. Defendants are ORDERED to file a response to the objections by November 22, 2021. Plaintiff may file a reply by December 13, 2021. Defendants are further ORDERED to file by November 22, 2021, a letter verifying that the y have complied fully with Judge Fox's Order dated July 21, 2021. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to Mr. Lenahan and note the mailing on the public docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 11/8/2021) (kv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
119
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 115 Motion for Protective Order. For the foregoing reasons, the defendants' motion for a protective order, Docket Entry No. 115, is denied. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 7/21/2021) (va) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER: In light of the Court's December 1, 2020 order, Docket Entry No. 100, directing the defendants to disclose to the plaintiff certain information, and the defendants' January 15, 2021 letter, raising concerns that the disclosed i nformation, including personal identifying information, may be subject to New York Criminal Procedure Law § 160.50, Docket Entry No. 107, it is hereby ordered that any such information disclosed by the defendants may be used by the plaint iff only in connection with this action. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 1/28/2021) (va) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
110
ORDER: It is ORDERED that the Defendants shall file a response to the objections by February 5, 2021. The Plaintiff may file a reply by February 26, 2021. It is further ORDERED that pending disposition of the objections the Defendants shall comp ly with the deadlines for production of documents set in the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum & Order dated December 1, 2020, and Order dated January 11, 2021. Dkt. Nos. 100, 106. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to the Plaintiff and to note the mailing on the public docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 1/22/2021) ( Responses due by 2/5/2021, Replies due by 2/26/2021.) (ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
109
ORDER re: 106 Order on Motion for Extension of Time; 100 Order on Motion for Sanctions, Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. The plaintiff filed objections to the Court's December 1, 2020 order granting the p laintiff's motion for sanctions and directing the defendants to provide discovery. See Docket Entry No. 108. In light of the plaintiff's objections, compliance with the December 1, 2020 order, Docket Entry No. 100, and the related Jan uary 11, 2021 order, Docket Entry No. 106, is stayed pending resolution of the plaintiff's objections. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 1/19/2021) (va) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
100
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 93 Motion for Sanctions; granting 93 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff's motion for sanctions, Docket Entry No. 93, is granted. On or before Dec ember 15, 2020, the defendants shall respond to the plaintiff's "Second Production of Document[] Requests." All pretrial discovery activities shall be completed within 60 days from December 15, 2020. The defendants are on notice that any future failure to comply with an order of the Court will be subject to sanctions, including the harshest sanctions. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 12/1/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
97
ORDER: Through a letter dated October 5, 2020, Docket Entry No. 96, the plaintiff has informed the Court that he "wish[es] to renew [his] application for assignment of counsel." The plaintiff requested previously that the Court se ek pro bono counsel to assist him in prosecuting this action. The request was granted in July 2019, see Docket Entry No. 49. Therefore, no need exists to renew the request, as the plaintiff has done. No attorney has agreed to represent the p laintiff, on a pro bono basis, as of the date of this order. It is not guarantied that an attorney will agree to represent the plaintiff, on a pro bono basis. Therefore, the plaintiff was advised by the Court, in July 2019, that he must con tinue to represent himself, until such time as an attorney agrees to represent him. The plaintiff's request to renew his application for the Court to seek pro bono counsel to assist him is denied, as unnecessary. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 10/19/2020) (va) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
75
ORDER: The time for the parties to complete all discovery, of whatever nature, is enlarged to April 30, 2020. The parties shall submit their joint pretrial order to the court on or before May 29, 2020. SO ORDERED. ( Discovery due by 4/30/202., Pretrial Order due by 5/29/2020.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 3/6/2020) Copy mailed to: Thomas Lenahan. (va) Modified on 3/6/2020 (va).
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER, All discovery in this matter is scheduled to be completed by February 27, 2020, and pretrial materials are due on March 12, 2020. Dkt. No. 67. In light of these deadlines, the parties are hereby ordered to notify the Court by letter on or bef ore March 5, 2020, whether they intend to file for summary judgment. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff and note its mailing on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Discovery due by 2/27/2020.) (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 2/3/20) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (yv)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a telephone conference shall be held in the above-captioned action on January 23, 2020, at 2:00 p.m. The Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkill Correctional Facility shall provide the plaintiff, Th omas Lenahan, DIN # 18-A3983, a private room with telephone service so that he may participate in the telephonic conference with the Court and counsel to the defendants on that date. Plaintiff Thomas Lenahan shall, on January 23, 2020, at 2:00 p.m., appear in a private room designated by the Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkll Correctional Facility to participate in the telephonic conference with the Court and counsel to the defendants for the duration of that conference. The call-in number for the conference is (888) 557-8511; the access code is 4862532. Counsel to the defendants shall serve a copy of this order on the Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkill Correctional Facility expeditiously and file proof of service with the Clerk of Court. SO ORDERED. ( Telephone Conference set for 1/23/2020 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 1/22/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the telephone conference scheduled to be held in the above-captioned action on January 8, 2020, at 4:30 p.m., shall be held on that date at 2:00 p.m. The Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkill C orrectional Facility shall provide the plaintiff, Thomas Lenahan, DIN# l 8-A3983, a private room with telephone service so that he may participate in the telephonic conference with the Court and counsel to the defendants on that date. Plaintiff Th omas Lenahan shall, on January 8, 2020, at 2:00 p.m., appear in a private room designated by the Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkill Correctional Facility to participate in the telephonic conference with the Court and counsel to the defendants for the duration of that conference. The call-in number for the conference is (888) 557-8511; the access code is 4862532. Counsel to the defendants shall serve a copy of this order on the Superintendent or other official in char ge of the Fishkill Correctional Facility expeditiously and file proof of service with the Clerk of Court. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 12/16/2019) ( Telephone Conference set for 1/8/2020 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox.) Copies mailed by Chambers. (ks)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a telephone conference shall be held in the above-captioned action on January 8, 2020, at 4:30 p.m. The Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkill Correctional Facility shall provide the plaintiff, Thomas Lenahan, DIN# 18-A3983, a private room with telephone service so that he may participate in the telephonic conference with the Court and counsel to the defendants on that date. Plaintiff Thomas Lenahan shall, on January 8, 2020, at 4:30 p.m. , appear in a private room designated by the Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkill Correctional Facility to participate in the telephonic conference with the Court and counsel to the defendants for the duration of that confere nce. Counsel to the defendants shall serve a copy of this order on the Superintendent or other official in charge of the Fishkill Correctional Facility expeditiously and file proof of service with the Clerk of Court. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 12/12/2019) ( Telephone Conference set for 1/8/2020 at 04:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox.) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ks)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER: The parties were directed to submit their joint pretrial order to the court on or before October 30, 2019, if no dispositive motion was made in this action. The docket sheet maintained by the Clerk of Court does not reflect that a disposit ive motion was made. The docket sheet also does not reflect that the parties' joint pretrial order was filed. Therefore, on or before December 11, 2019, the parties shall submit their joint pretrial order to the court. That document must confo rm to the requirements for such an order that are found in the Individual Rules of Practice of the assigned district judge. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 11/26/2019) ( Pretrial Order due by 12/11/2019.) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ks)
|
|
Filing
49
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Plaintiff Thomas Lenahan, ("Lenahan"), who is proceeding pro se in this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, has made an application for the Court to appoint counsel to represent him; as f urther set forth herein. According to Lenahan's submission, the "factual investigation required to win this case is beyond the scope of anything an incarcerated individual can conduct." This may be so in the instant case ow ing, in part, to the transient residency, within the defendants' jail facility, of the pretrial detainees whom Lenahan would need to: (1) contact to prepare his case; and (2) summon to the trial of this action as witnesses. In addition , given the nature of the allegations Lenahan has made in the complaint, it seems very likely that issues of credibility will dominate this litigation. Therefore, cross-examination will be the major proof presented to the fact-finder. Having so meone skilled in that art will be vital to Lenahan's ability to present his case. Nothing in the record before the Court indicates that Lenahan possesses that skill. Furthermore, testimony from persons with expertise in dentistry, psychia try and conditions of correctional facility confinement will likely have to be elicited; securing witnesses with such expertise, while incarcerated, is likely to be extremely difficult for Lenahan to accomplish without the aid of counsel. More over, nothing in the record before the Court indicates that Lenahan possesses any particular knowledge or skill that would enable him to analyze the complex issues associated with the subject matter areas noted above about which witnesses with expertise will likely testify. This factor, like the other factors addressed above, militates in favor of granting Lenahan's application for appointed counsel. Having considered the various factors outlined in Hodge, supra, the Court finds that it would be reasonable and appropriate to grant Lenahan's application for appointment of counsel. Therefore, the Office of Pro Se Litigation for this judicial district is directed to request pro bono counsel for the plain tiff in accordance with the applicable procedures. Lenahan must be mindful that he has to continue to represent himself until such time as an attorney agrees to represent him pro bono. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 7/24/2019) (mro) Transmission to Office of Pro Se Litigation 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.
