Dipinto v. Westchester County et al
| Phillip Dipinto |
| Westchester County, Thomas Lauro and Jeffrey Bryant |
| 1:2018cv00793 |
| January 29, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Valerie E. Caproni |
| Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12111 |
| 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
136
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 135 Memorandum & Opinion in favor of Westchester County against Phillip Dipinto. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated February 1, 2023, the motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is dismissed; accordingly, the case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 2/1/2023) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km)
|
|
Filing
110
ORDER: Counsel for all parties appeared today by telephone for a pre-motion conference. Newly appearing counsel for plaintiff advised that Zachary Tortora is no longer an attorney on this matter. The Court directed that by 12/7/2021, Plaintiff' ;s counsel shall confer with Mr. Smith concerning the appearances of record in this matter, determine which attorneys are properly listed as counsel for plaintiff herein, and file via ECF: (1) a letter confirming that conference was held with Mr. Smith, and (2) a motion to relieve Zachary Tortora, and any other attorneys as necessary, as counsel of record herein pursuant to Local Civil Rule 1.4. With respect to defendant's anticipated motion for summary judgment, by close of business today, defendant shall send to plaintiff's newly appearing counsel the 56.1 Statement in Word format (Doc. 104-1). By 12/14/2021, plaintiff shall file via ECF: (1) opposition to the pre-motion letter (Doc. 104), and (2) a r evised 56.1 Statement in compliance with the Court's Individual Practices Rule 4.E.iv. that requires the opposing party's responses to be set out directly beneath each entry in the movant's 56.1 Statement thereby producing a single document. With respect to defendant's request to remove Jeffrey Bryant from the caption of the action (Doc. 105), in light of the Court's 10/19/2020 Memorandum Opinion and Order (Doc. 86) and the withdrawal of plaintiff's state law claims, memorialized by Court Order (Doc. 103), there being no opposition to this request, Jeffrey Bryant should be terminated as a defendant herein, and removed from the caption of this action. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate Jeffrey Bryant as a defendant individually and in his official capacity. SO ORDERED. Jeffrey Bryant (in his official capacity) and Jeffrey Bryant (individually) terminated. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 11/30/2021) (tg)
|
|
Filing
86
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 75 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Thomas Lauro, Westchester County, Jeffrey Bryant., Based upon the foregoing, Defendants' motion to dismiss the SAC is GRANTED in part. Plaintiffs cla ims against Lauro, the NYSHRL claims against the County and Bryant in his official capacity (Claims 4-7), the NYSHRL retaliation claim against Bryant in his individual capacity (Claim 5), and the Monell claim (Claims 8-9) are DISMISSED. Plaintiffs ADA discrimination (Claim 1), retaliation (Claim 2), and hostile work environment (Claim 3) claims against the County, and his NYSHRL discrimination (Claim 4), hostile work environment (Claim 6), and aiding and abetting (Claim 7) claims again st Bryant in his individual capacity, shall proceed to discovery. The Court will issue an Initial Pretrial Conference Order and set a conference date in short order. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending motion sequence (Doc. 75) and terminate Defendant Thomas Lauro from this action. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 10/19/2020) Thomas Lauro (individually) and Thomas Lauro (in his official capacity) terminated. (ks)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER granting 73 FIRST LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion to Dismiss. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 11/15/2019) (jca)
|
|
Filing
60
OPINION & ORDER re: 52 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Westchester County, Jeffrey Bryant: For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants' Motion To Dismiss with respect to Plaintiff's ADA and NYSHRL retaliation claims. The Co urt denies Defendants' Motion To Dismiss with respect to Plaintiff's ADA and NYSHRL disability discrimination claims. Dismissal is without prejudice. Plaintiff may file a second amended complaint with the Court within 30 days of the date of this Opinion. Plaintiff should include within that second amended complaint all changes to correct the deficiencies identified in this Opinion that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. Plaintiff is further advised that the second amended complain t will completely replace, not supplement, the instant Amended Complaint. The second amended complaint must contain all of the claims, exhibits, and factual allegations that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. If Plaintiff fails to abide by the 3 0-day deadline, the claims dismissed without prejudice may be dismissed with prejudice, and Plaintiff's case will go forward only on those claims not dismissed. Plaintiff shall complete service on Lauro within 30 days of the date of this Opinion, or he will be dismissed from this case. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate the pending Motion. (Dkt. No. 52.) (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 8/29/2019) (jwh)
|
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.
