Lopez v. New York City Department of Education et al
| Perry Lopez |
| New York City Department of Education, Jennifer Ade and Nitza Bellamy |
| 1:2017cv09205 |
| November 22, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Ronnie Abrams |
| Employment |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 621 |
| 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
94
ORDER granting 93 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. Application granted. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 5/26/2023) (ate)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER: denying 88 Letter Motion to Seal. The motion to seal the Memorandum of Law and supporting documents in full is denied. Defendants may propose redactions to these documents and justify the need for such redactions, consistent with Lugosch v. Pyramid Co., 435 F.3d 110, 119-21 (2d Cir. 2006). Defendants shall also ensure that the redacted documents are made availableto and properly served on Plaintiff, such that he may have an opportunity to respond. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 5/24/2023) (ama)
|
|
Filing
85
SANCTIONS ORDER: In both Thrane and Zalisko, the court imposed sanctions of $1000, sua sponte, upon the party that failed to send a representative with "full authority" to the settlement conference. In Grenier, acting on plaintiff 's motion, the court ordered defendant pay $4,185 to plaintiff's counsel, representing attorneys' fees and other expenses incurred as a result of the misconduct, and another $4,185 to the Clerk of Court. 2014 WL 1284635, at *9 (noting that "[a] monetary penalty paid to the court has the added benefit[] of... helping to offset the costs imposed on public institutions by dilatory conduct"). Here, because plaintiff is representing himself pro se, he incurred n o attorneys' fees in connection with the failed settlement conference. However, he was required to travel to Manhattan from his home in New Jersey. I therefore conclude that the appropriate sanction, pursuant Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f)(1)(B) and (C ), is the sum of $1100, for which DOE and the Law Department are jointly responsible. $1000 shall be paid to the Clerk of Court, and $100 shall be paid directly to plaintiff. Payment shall be made within 30 days of this Order. SO ORDERED (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 5/4/2023) (ks) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing.
|
|
Filing
83
ORDER: Consequently, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Defendants' counsel shall promptly serve a copy of this Order on the pro se plaintiff by email at his last known email address, and shall follow up with a telephone call tomorrow morning. 2. The parties shall conduct a good-faith settlement discussion, in person or by telephone, and exchanged at least one good-faith demand and offer, before the Court-facilitated settlement conference begins. If by that 2:15 p.m. time (when the conf erence is scheduled to begin) they have not yet complied with these requirements, the Court will make a room available for that purpose. 3. Plaintiff is reminded that the overlength settlement letter (rendered in 9-point type) that he submitted in F ebruary of this year (together with multiple "artifacts") did not comply with the 1/31/23 Order, and that the Court is under no obligation to attempt to read it. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 4/26/2023) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
79
ORDER granting 77 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. By letter dated February 23, 2023 (Dkt. 77), defendant DOE requests that the conference be adjourned, and represents that plaintiff Lopez does not oppose the adjournment. Defendant's r equest is GRANTED. The settlement conference scheduled for March 1, 2023 is ADJOURNED to April 27, 2023, at 2:15 p.m. The parties' updated confidential settlement submissions are due by April 20, 2023. The Court takes this opportunity to note that plaintiff Lopez, who is representing himself, sent a series of 13 emails to the Court between 7:01 p.m. Tuesday night and 1:26 p.m. Thursday afternoon. Attached to those emails were (1) his pre-settlement conference letter, which was rendered in 9-point font but still exceeded the six-page limit; (2) his Acknowledgment Form; and (3)more than 20 additional attachments (some submitted multiple times), most of which appear tobe evidentiary items or "artifacts." Many of the attac hed documents are highlighted and/or annotated, presumably by plaintiff. Plaintiff is reminded that the proceeding now rescheduled for April 27, 2023, is a settlement conference, not a trial, and will take place over a span of hours, not days. As difficult as it may be to "boil down" his surviving claims for discussion at the conference, that is precisely what he must do to comply with this Courts Order and make efficient use of the opportunity. Thus, when plaintiff submits his up dated settlement letter, on or before April 20, 2023, it must be limited to six pages (in 12-point font) and may attach a maximum of 20 pages of exhibits. Plaintiff is further reminded that his updated settlement letter must include a brief descrip tion of the parties' settlement negotiations to date, including the date and time of their last good-faith settlement discussion and the terms of each party's most recent demand or offer. Settlement Conference set for 4/27/2023 at 02:15 PM before Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 2/24/2023) (rro)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER: The Court will hold a conference in this case on January 12, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. to address the pending Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. The conference will be held telephonically unless the parties prefer otherwise. The pa rties may access the conference with the following information: Dial-In Number (888) 363-4749; Access Code 1015508#. This line will be publicly accessible. If the scheduled date and time is inconvenient for the parties, the parties shall confer and propose an alternate date. SO ORDERED. ( Telephone Conference set for 1/12/2023 at 02:00 PM before Judge Ronnie Abrams.) (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 1/3/2023) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER re: 44 Memorandum & Opinion, Set Deadlines. On July 28, 2020, the Court issued an opinion granting Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. See Dkt. 44. In that opinion, the Court also granted Plaintiff lea ve to amend the complaint no later than September 28, 2020. See id. at 30. To date, Plaintiff has not done so. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment and close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 10/5/2020) (kv) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
44
OPINION & ORDER re: 28 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Nitza Bellamy, Jennifer Ade, New York City Department of Education. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is granted. Plaintiff's claims against the individual defendants are dismissed with prejudice. In light of his pro se status, the Court will permit Plaintiff one final attempt to amend his complaint with respect to the DOE, to the extent he has a good fa ith basis to do so. Should he choose to amend his ADEA claims, Plaintiff must allege with specificity the lead teacher positions he applied for and was rejected from within P.S. 46, including when he applied to such positions, as well as facts giv ing rise to an inference of age discrimination on the part of the DOE. Should he amend his claims under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act, Plaintiff must plead facts from which the Court may infer a causal connection between Plaintiff's advo cacy on behalf of special education students and the adverse employment actions allegedly taken against him. Plaintiff's second amended complaint shall be filed no later than September 28, 2020. SO ORDERED. (Amended Pleadings due by 9/28/2020.) (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 7/28/2020) (rro) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER:On August 19, 2019, Plaintiff Perry Lopez, proceeding pro se, filed his Amended Complaint, Dkt. 25, and on November 4, 2019, Defendants moved to dismiss, Dkt. 28. On January 2, 2020, Plaintiff filed his opposition, attaching excerpts of va rious emails that Plaintiff sent or received while employed at P.S. 46. Dkt. 38. Defendants replied in support of their motion onJanuary 30, 2020. Dkt. 41. In their reply brief, Defendants reference certain emails with even numbered page numbers. Se e, e.g., Dkt. 41 at 5 (citing emails at A010 and A026-A028, among others). Plaintiff's opposition filed on the docket, however, appears to only include the odd numbered pages. See Dkt. 38 at 12-26. No later than 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 2 2, 2020, Defendants shall file a letter confirming that their citations to the emails are accurate, and if so, they shall also file all of the emails, including the even-numbered pages, on the docket. Defendants shall provide a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 7/20/2020) (rj)
|
|
Filing
22
OPINION AND ORDER re: 8 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Nitza Bellamy, Jennifer Ade, New York City Department of Education., Jennifer Ade (Prinicpal, PS 46) and Nitza Bellamy (Asst. Prinicipal PS 46) terminated., For the foreg oing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint is granted with prejudice with respect to the individual defendants, Jennifer Alexander-Ade and Nitza Gonzalez, and without prejudice with respect to the DOE. Plaintiff sh all file his first amended complaint no later than July 29, 2019. If Plaintiff fails do so by that time, this case will be dismissed in its entirety for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. SO ORDERED. Amended Pleadings due by 7/29/2019. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 6/26/2019) (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.
