Schuster v. Charter Communications, Inc.
Plaintiff: Akobi Schuster
Defendant: Charter Communications, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2018cv01826
Filed: February 28, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: New York
Presiding Judge: Richard J. Sullivan
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 6, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 105 ORDER: Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Schuster's requests for permission to make such requests is DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions pending at Doc. Nos. 103 and 104, and to send a copy of this Order to Schuster via email at the updated email address listed on the electronic case docket and via mail at the address listed on his most recent Notice of Change of Address (2266 Fifth Ave., P.O. Box 790, New York, NY 10037). (See Doc. No. 79.) (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 9/6/2023) Sitting by Designation. (ate)
June 26, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 101 ORDER denying and denying as moot 98 Letter Motion for Leave to File Document; denying as moot 99 Motion re: 98 MOTION for Leave to File., 99 MOTION CLARIFICATION OF JUDGE RICHARD J. SULLIVAN'S 4/7/23 ORDER re: 96 Orde r. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Schuster's requests forthe Court's permission to file complaints with the Department of Justice and the Departmentof Labor are DENIED. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Schuster's request for permi ssion to make sucha request is DENIED AS MOOT. Accordingly, the Court declines toengage with Schuster's requests for further explanation of the Filing Injunction or his invitationsto provide advisory opinions on matters that are plainly outside the scope of the Filing Injunction.IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Schuster's requests for clarification of the Court's FilingInjunction are DENIED AS MOOT. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Schuster's request to lift the Filing I njunction (Doc. No. 100 at 5) is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to send a copy of this Order to Schuster via email at the updated email address listed on the electronic case docket and via mail at the address listed on his most recent Notice of Change of Address (2266 Fifth Ave., P.O. Box 790, New York, NY 10037). (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 6/26/2023) Sitting by Designation. (ate)
April 7, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 96 ORDER: Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Schuster's requests for the Court's permission to make such requests of Charter and the Department of Labor (Doc. Nos. 89, 91) are DENIED AS MOOT. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THA T Schuster's requests for the Court's permission to file complaints before "Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Schuster'srequests for the Court's permission to file complaints before "the appropriate authorities" ; (Doc.Nos. 92, 93) are DENIED.The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to send a copy of this Order to Schuster viaemail at the updated email address listed on the electronic case docket and via mail at the addresslisted on his most recent Notice of Change of Address (2266 Fifth Ave., P.O. Box 790, New York,NY 10037). (See Doc. No. 79.) the appropriate authorities" (Doc. Nos. 92, 93) are DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to send a copy of this Order to Schuster via e mail at the updated email address listed on the electronic case docket and via mail at the address listed on his most recent Notice of Change of Address (2266 Fifth Ave., P.O. Box 790, New York, NY 10037). (See Doc. No. 79.) (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 4/7/2023) Sitting by Designation. (ate) Modified on 4/7/2023 (ate).
February 27, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 88 ORDER: To the extent that Plaintiff is asking for "permission to seek help from a mental physician" (Doc. No. 86 at 23; Doc. No. 87 at 23), Plaintiff's request does not relate to a filing with a tribunal, and permission from this Court is not required under the Court's April 2021 order. In all other respects, the request is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to send a copy of this Order to Schuster via email at the updated email address liste d on the electronic case docket and via mail at the address listed on his most recent Notice of Change of Address (2266 Fifth Ave., P.O. Box 790, New York, NY 10037). (See Doc. No. 79.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 2/27/2023) (va)
February 2, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 84 ORDER denying 83 Motion re: 83 MOTION TO CLARIFY PRIOR COURT ORDER re: 81 Order. The Court's prior order (Doc. No. 81) was stated clearly. No further clarification is necessary, and the Court will not offer advisory opinions on the questions posed in Plaintiff's "Motion to Clarify Prior Court Order." Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 2/2/2023) Sitting by Designation. (ate)
January 29, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 81 ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Schuster's requests for the Court's permission to make such requests of Chatter and OSHA (Doc. Nos. 78, 80) are DISMISSED AS MOOT. In so ordering, the Court clarifies that it makes no endorsement of Sch uster's proposed requests for documents; if Charter and/or OSHA deny Schuster's requests for the documents he seeks, the Court will not intervene. The Court further clarifies that, if Schuster wished to "fil[e] in any tribunal an[] action, motion, petition, complaint, or request for relief" on the basis of documents obtained from Charter or OSHA, he would need to "obtain[] leave from this Court" before doing so. (Doc. No. 50 at 24.) The Clerk of Court is respe ctfully directed to send a copy of this Order to Schuster via email at the updated email address listed on the electronic case docket and via mail at the address listed on his most recent Notice of Change of Address (2266 Fifth Ave., P.O. Box 790, New York, NY 10037). (See Doc. No. 79.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 1/29/23) (yv)
August 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 71 ORDER: In sum: for the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT (1) Charter is relieved of responding to any request from Schuster under the filing injunction unless specifically directed by the Court to do so; (2) Charter's request to impose monetary sanctions on Schuster is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and (3) Schuster shall voluntarily dismiss with prejudice his complaint in Schuster II, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), within seven calendar days of the filing of this Order or else be held in civil contempt of this Court. Lastly, the Court clarifies that the filing injunction imposed on April 8, 2021 (Doc. No. 50) does not prevent Schuster from appealing from this Order, but the Court certif ies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any such appeal would not be taken in good faith, see Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to send a copy of this Order to Schuster via email at the updated email address listed on the electronic case docket and via mail at the return address listed on his most recent pro se letters (30 W. 141st St., #16S, New York, NY 10037). (See Doc. Nos. 61, 63, 65, 67, 69.) (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 8/3/2022) Sitting by Designation. (ate)
June 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 66 MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying 56 Motion re: 56 MOTION REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO FILE UNDER FILING INJUNCTION. For the reasons stated above, Schuster's requests for permission under the filing injunction (Doc. Nos. 56, 57, 58, 65) are DENIED, and Schuster is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in a single letter of no more than five typed pages, why his filing of the complaint in Schuster II does not constitute a violation of the filing injunction imposed by the Court on April 8, 2021 (Doc . No. 50), warranting the Court's summary denial of all and any future requests he might make for permission under such filing injunction. Schuster shall submit his letter to the Court no later than Friday, July 15, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. If it so wishes, Charter shall submit to the Court a reply to Schuster's letter no later than Friday, July 29, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. In imposing this show-cause order, the Court is cognizant of Schuster's track record of "t[a]k[ing] advantage o f the Court's [prior] order[s]... to show cause" by using his responses to such orders to "bring[]... host[s] of baseless accusations against" various individuals and entities he has encountered in the course of the underlying litigation here. (Doc. No. 50 at 20.) The Court has previously stated its view that such conduct is "vexatious," "harassing," and an abuse of the Court's resources and the resources of the various entities that may feel co mpelled to respond to Schuster's accusations made in the inappropriate vehicle of his responses to the Court's show-cause orders. (Id.; see also id. at 22.) The Court will now explicitly warn Schuster not to persist with such conduct. Sp ecifically, in his letter responding to this Memorandum and Order, Schuster shall address only the question of whether or not he violated the filing injunction by filing the Schuster II complaint in New York state court without first obtaining le ave from this Court. Accordingly, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Schuster shall not in any fashion use his letter responding to today's show-cause order (or any other submission he might make until the Court has ruled on the parties' respons es to today's show-cause order) to raise any new allegations against any individual or entity he has encountered at any point in this litigation; to renew, reiterate, or "clarify" any such allegations that he has made in previous filings; to make, renew, or "clarify" any new or previous request to file a complaint, petition, grievance, or other form of action on the basis of any such allegations in this Court or any other tribunal; or to otherwise make or discuss any other argument not directly pertaining to the question of whether he violated the Courts April 8, 2021 filing injunction by filing the Schuster II complaint on March 10, 2022. If Schuster includes any such allegations, requests, or arguments in any submission made to the Court prior to the Court's ruling on the parties' responses to today's show-cause order, he will be subject to additional sanctions, including monetary penalties or being held in contempt. See, e.g., Ra nasinghe v. Kennell, No. 16-cv-2170 (JMF), 2017 WL 384357, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 25, 2017), aff'd, 718 F. App'x 82 (2d Cir. 2018). In the event that Schuster were to violate this directive in any submission following this Memorandum and O rder, the Court would urge Charter to brief, in its reply letter, the issue of what specific sanctions would thus be warranted. Finally, the Court clarifies that the filing injunction imposed on April 8, 2021 (Doc. No. 50) does not prevent Schuste r from appealing from this Memorandum and Order, but the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any such appeal would not be taken in good faith, see Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to send a copy of this Memorandum and Order to Schuster via email at the updated email address listed on the electronic case docket and via mail at the return address listed on his most recent pro se letters (30 W. 141st St., #16S, New York, NY 10037). (See Doc. Nos. 61, 63, 65.). (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 6/26/2022) Sitting by Designation. (ate)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Schuster v. Charter Communications, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Akobi Schuster
Represented By: Walker Green Harman, Jr.
Represented By: Edgar Mikel Rivera
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Charter Communications, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?