Dobbs et al v. Metropolitan Transit Authority et al
| Alexandria Dobbs and Frank Perino |
| Metropolitan Transit Authority, New York City Transit Authority, John Doe and John Doe 2 |
| 1:2017cv08199 |
| October 24, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Andrew L. Carter |
| Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12132 |
| 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
128
ORDER: On September 3, 2021 the Court ordered the parties to file a joint status report by October 28, 2021. (ECF No. 127). To date, the Court has not received the requested report. The parties are hereby ordered to file a joint status report no later than November 8, 2021. The report shall include an update on the status of mediation and settlement discussions. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 11/2/2021) (js)
|
|
Filing
122
ORDER granting 121 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 2/15/2021) (js)
|
|
Filing
120
ORDER granting 117 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 1/15/2021) (js)
|
|
Filing
109
OPINION AND ORDER: re: 90 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. filed by Metropolitan Transit Authority, New York City Transit Authority, 94 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint. filed by Advance Transit Co. Inc., John Doe 2. Alexandria Hobbs and Frank Perino brought this action against Defendants the New York City Transit Authority, the Metropolitan Transit Authority, Advance Transit Co. Inc., and John Doe 2, claiming violat ions of Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, New York City Human Rights Law, and New York State Human Rights Law. (Second Amended Complaint ("SAC")). Defendants separately moved to dismiss t he Complaint. (ECF Nos. 90, 94). Those motions are DENIED. All other provisions as further set forth in this order. Although this issue was not briefed by the parties, the Court also notes that this case may raise standing problems given the alleg ations of a past injury that potentially may be remedied by the provision of accessible policies to plaintiffs. See Muhammad v. Annucci, et al., No. 19-cv- 3528, 2020 WL 1303571 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020). The parties should be prepared to address this issue going forward. The parties should submit a status report in this matter by September 24, 2020 stating how they would like to proceed. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 9/10/2020) (js)
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER granting 87 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 11/21/2019) (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.
