Herman et al v. Town of Cortlandt, Inc. et al
| Kathleen Herman and Jeff Ghiazza |
| Town of Cortlandt, Inc., Linda Puglisi, Richard Becker, Francis X. Farrell, Ken Hoch, Chris Kehoe, John E. Sloan, Thomas F. Wood, Esq., Thomas F. Wood, Holly Haight and Robert Dykeman |
| 1:2018cv02440 |
| March 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Dutchess |
| Cathy Seibel |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
311
ORDER: It having been reported to this Court that the claims in this case have been settled, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is discontinued with prejudice but without costs; provided, however, that if settlement is not consummated within si xty (60) days of the date of this order, Plaintiff may apply by letter within the sixty-day period for restoration of the action to the Calendar of the undersigned, in which event the action will be restored. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 11/27/2023) (mml)
|
|
Filing
292
MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 285 Letter denying as moot 259 Motion in Limine. ENDORSEMENT: As I explained when Defendants initially suggested filing a motion in limine seeking to dismiss the individual capacity takings claim against Defendant Ke hoe, see ECF No. 222 (requesting "permission to move in limine to have the takings claim dismissed as against Mr. Kehoe, in his individual capacity, prior to trial), Defendants cannot move for summary judgment under the guise of a motion in li mine, see Minute Entry dated July 28, 2023; see also Williams v. Rushmore Loan Mgmt. Servs. LLC, No. 15-CV-673, 2017 WL 822793, at *1 (D. Conn. Mar. 2, 2017) ("A motion in limine is not the proper vehicle for seeking a dispositive ruling on a claim.") (collecting cases). Nevertheless, in the interests of narrowing the issues for trial, Defendants may have a brief extension - until Monday, November 20, 2023- to cross-move for summary judgment on the individual capacity claim against Defendant Kehoe, in full compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Civil Rule 56.1. Plaintiffs shall then have until Monday, November 27, 2023 to respond. There shall be no reply. If Defendants fail to so move by November 20, 2023 they may make a motion concerning the individual capacity claim against Defendant Kehoe at the close of Plaintiffs' case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 50. ECF No. 259 is denied as moot and the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate that motion. As to the timeliness of Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, the Clerk of Court has informed me that the motion was timely filed and that the delay in docketing it cannot be attributed to Plaintiffs. In such circumstances, I will consider both Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, see ECF No. 270, and Defendants' opposition, see ECF Nos. 286-288, to be timely filed. Plaintiffs' reply to Defendants' opposition remains due on November 20, 2023. See ECF No. 256. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 11/16/2023) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
247
OPINION & ORDER: re: 192 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Robert Dykeman. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Dyckman's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending motion, (ECF No. 192), and to terminate Defendant Dyckman (incorrectly sued here as Robert Dykeman) as a Defendant.SO ORDERED., Robert Dykeman (Employee) and Robert Dykeman (Personally) terminated. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 10/13/2023) (ama) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
230
ORDER: In ECF No. 227, Plaintiff Ghiazza stated that he sent a letter dated July 24, 2023 (ECF No. 224) to the Court's temporary pro se filing portal as directed, but "[f]or all its good work, the pro se office is very slow; and my letter sent on July 24 did not appear until July 25, 2023." As I explained on the record today, that was no excuse for Plaintiffs' failure to appear at the July 28, 2023 conference, and accordingly they must pay $100 to each Defendant. Bu t that was also not true. The data associated with the email transmitting ECF No. 224 to the temporary pro se filing email box shows that it was emailed at 4:49 pm on July 25, 2023. The filing receipt shows that the Pro Se Office docketed it at 10 :16 am the next day. The Pro Se Office is not "slow" at all. The Court is fed up with the false excuses from Plaintiffs, who are warned that in the future, should I have occasion to sanction them again, they should not expect as lenient a sanction as I imposed today. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 8/22/2023) (mml)
|
|
Filing
81
CANCELLATION NOTICE: The settlement conference scheduled for Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2:15 PM, before the Honorable Lisa Margaret Smith, United States Magistrate Judge, in the matter of Herman, et al. v. Town of Cortland, Inc., et al., 18-cv-2440 (CS) (LMS), has been cancelled. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 2/20/2020) Copy Mailed to Pro Se Plaintiffs of Record. (mml)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER FOR LIMITED APPEARANCE OF PRO BONO COUNSEL:...The Clerk of Court is directed to attempt to locate pro bono counsel to represent the plaintiff at a settlement conference to be conducted before the Magistrate Judge. If counsel is located, such co unsel will represent the plaintiff solely for purposes of the settlement negotiations and that representation will terminate at the conclusion of the settlement process. If the Clerk of Court is unable to locate counsel, the plaintiff must appear wit hout counsel at the settlement conference. If the plaintiff objects to this grant of pro bono counsel, the plaintiff must file an objection within 14 days of the date of this order. In the event the plaintiff files such an objection, this grant for p ro bono counsel is vacated. Once counsel has filed a Notice of Limited Appearance of Pro Bono Counsel, the Court will set a date for the settlement conference. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 1/31/2020) (kv) Transmission to Office of Pro Se Litigation for processing.
|
|
Filing
66
ORDER: Accordingly, the Order and the corresponding Judgment, (Doc. 58), are vacated, except insofar as the due process and FOIA claims are concerned, and Defendants may raise their remaining arguments at a later date, if appropriate. The motion for a preliminary injunction is denied. Plaintiffs have not shown any irreparable harm not redressable by money damages, let alone that any such harm is imminent. See, e.g., Faiveley Transp. Malmo AB v. Wabtec Corp., 559 F.3d 110, 118 (2d Cir. 20 09). The parties are directed to appear before the Court on January 29, 2020 at 2:30 pm for a status conference. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to: 1) vacate Docs. 57 and 58; 2) reopen the case; and 3) send a copy of this Order to Plaintiffs. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 12/27/2019) Case reopened.(ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
57
OPINION & ORDER re: 46 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) filed by Robert Dykeman, Linda Puglisi, Holly Haight, Town of Cortlandt, Inc., Chris Kehoe, Thomas F. Wood, John E. Sloan, Ken Hoch, Thomas F. Wood, Es q., Richard Becker, Francis X. Farrell. Accordingly, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The takings claim is dismissed without prejudice. The due process claims are dismissed with prejudice. Any state law claims are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending motion, (Doc. 46), and close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 5/30/2019) (mml) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk 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.
