Farooqi v. New York City Department Of Education et al

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District Farooqi v. New York City Department Of Education et al

Farooqi v. New York City Department Of Education et al

Case Number:	1:2019cv03436
Filed:	November 25, 2019
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)

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
April 9, 2020	Filing 26 OPINION AND ORDER: The defendants are granted judgment on Farooqi's alienage and race discrimination claims brought under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983. The only claim that remains is for FMLA retaliation. A concurrently filed Order sets forth the schedule for the litigation of that claim. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 4/9/2020) (jca) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
November 25, 2019	Filing 25 ORDER terminating 19 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part 19 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. It is hereby ORDERED that the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted with respect to the plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. 7; 1983 claims for: (1) age discrimination, (2) malicious abuse of process, and (3) stigma plus. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall comply with their Rule 26(a) (1), Fed. R. Civ. P., initial disclosure obligations by December 13, 2019. IT I S FURTHER ORDERED that a schedule will be set that governs the further conduct of pretrial proceedings pending this Court's ruling on the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings with respect to the plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for prior alienage and race discrimination, upon which the Court reserved judgment at the November 22 conference. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 11/22/2019) (jca)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 9, 2020

Filing 26 OPINION AND ORDER: The defendants are granted judgment on Farooqi's alienage and race discrimination claims brought under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983. The only claim that remains is for FMLA retaliation. A concurrently filed Order sets forth the schedule for the litigation of that claim. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 4/9/2020) (jca) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.

November 25, 2019

Filing 25 ORDER terminating 19 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part 19 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. It is hereby ORDERED that the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted with respect to the plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. 7; 1983 claims for: (1) age discrimination, (2) malicious abuse of process, and (3) stigma plus. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall comply with their Rule 26(a) (1), Fed. R. Civ. P., initial disclosure obligations by December 13, 2019. IT I S FURTHER ORDERED that a schedule will be set that governs the further conduct of pretrial proceedings pending this Court's ruling on the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings with respect to the plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for prior alienage and race discrimination, upon which the Court reserved judgment at the November 22 conference. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 11/22/2019) (jca)

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: Farooqi v. New York City Department Of Education et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| 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?