Walker v. City of New York et al
| Mortia Walker |
| City Of New York, Phillip Pena, Pasquale Dethomas, Sergeant Gibson and John Doe Police Officers #1-2 |
| 1:2018cv04815 |
| May 31, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Bronx |
| Paul G. Gardephe |
| 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
52
INFANT COMPROMISE ORDER: NOW, on motion of NICOLE BELLINA, attorney for the Plaintiff, it is ORDERED, that MORTIA WALKER, the mother and natural guardian of the infant K.W., is hereby permitted to enter into a compromise and settlement of the infant's claims for relief for the sum of $39,500, to be paid by defendants City of New York and $500 to be paid by Sergeant Lamont Gibson; and it is further ORDERED, that out of said sum, attorney for Plaintiff, STOLL , GLICKMAN & BELLINA, LLP, is to receive the sum of $13,333 as compensation for legal services, and $244 for reimbursed expenditures for a total of $13577, in connection with settlement of MORTIA WALKER'S claims on behalf of her infant son K.W.; and it is further ORDERED, that the balance of $26,423 ($25,923 by the City of New York and $500 by Sergeant Gibson) be paid to MORTIA WALKER, the mother and natural guardian of K.W. The sums shall be depos ited in an interest bearing account in the name of MORTIA WALKER, as mother and natural guardian of K.W., to the credit of said infant, at Ridgewood Savings Bank, 3824 White Plains Rd., Bronx, NY 10467 (the "Bank") and to be held for the sole use and benefit of the infant in an account paying the highest rate of interest available, until the infant reaches the age of eighteen years; as further set forth herein. Local Civil Rule 83.2(a)(1) requires parties to obtain court approval before settling an action on behalf of a minor child. In determining whether an infant compromise should be approved, the reviewing court "shall conform, as nearly as may be, to the New York State statutes and rules.&quo t; Local Civil R. 83.2(a)(1). In accordance with the applicable New York statutes and rules, courts in this jurisdiction focus on "whether (1) the proposed settlement is in the infant's best interests; and (2) the proposed attorney 's fees and costs are reasonable." D.J. ex rel. Roberts v. City of New York, 11-cv-5458, 2012 WL 5431034, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 16, 2012), report and recommendation adopted sub nom., Roberts v. City of New York, 2012 WL 5429521 (S. D.N.Y. Nov. 7, 2012) (citing Local Civil R. 83.2(a); N.Y. Jud. Law § 474; N.Y. C.P.L.R. §§ 12051208). "There is a strong presumption that a settlement is fair and reasonable where '(i) the settlement is not col lusive but was reached after arm's length negotiation; (ii) the proponents have counsel experienced in similar cases; [and] (iii) there has been sufficient discovery to enable counsel to act intelligently,'" Campbell v. City of Ne w York, 15-cv-2088, 2015 WL 7019831, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 10, 2015) (quoting Orlandi ex rel. Colon v. Navistar Leasing Co., 09-cv-4855, 2011 WL 3874870, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2011)). Under New York Judiciary Law § 474, whether the amoun t of attorneys' fees requested as part of an infant compromise proceeding is appropriate turns on whether it is "suitable compensation for the attorney for his service...[on] behalf of the...infant." Id. at *4 (quoting Allstate Ins. Co. v. Williams, 04-cv-4575, 2006 WL 2711538, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 21, 2006)). The agreed-upon contingency fee is only a guide, and the Court must make an independent determination. Having carefully reviewed all of the documents submitted by the parties, the Court finds that the proposed settlement is in the best interest of infant K.W. and that the proposed attorney's fees are reasonable. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 1/6/2021) (mro) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing.
|
|
Filing
36
ORDER: In light of the information set forth in the Status Report from Corporation Counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall submit a joint status letter to the Court no later than May 8, 2020. In that letter, the parties shall address : (1) the status of the CCRB proceedings; (2) the status of Gibsons representation by counsel and of the representation of the other individual defendants named in the complaint, including the names and contact information for each counsel; and (3 ) each party's position on lifting the stay of this action. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for the individual defendants shall promptly enter a notice of appearance on the Court docket. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to correct the docket sheet to reflect that the New York City Law Department, Office of Corporation Counsel, does not represent any of the individual defendants in this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 4/15/2020) Attorney Kathleen Deborah Reilly and Steve Stavridis terminated. (ks)
|
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.
