Velasquez v. J & E Hair Salon Inc. et al
| Ricardo Velasquez |
| Partnership 92 West, L.P. and J & E Hair Salon Inc. a New York corporation doing business as J & E Hair Salon |
| 1:2021cv02726 |
| March 30, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Jesse M Furman |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of D.E. 11, Order Scheduling Default Judgment Briefing and Show Cause Hearing served on J & E HAIR SALON INC., J & E HAIR SALON, and PARTNERSHIP 92 WEST, L.P. on 5/25/21. Service was made by Mail. Document filed by Ricardo Velasquez. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Proof of Service - Facility, #2 Exhibit Proof of Service - Tenant Defendant, #3 Exhibit Proof of Service - Landlord Defendant).(Weitz, Ben-Zion) |
Filing 11
ORDER SCHEDULING DEFAULT JUDGMENT BRIEFING AND SHOW CAUSE HEARING: On March 30, 2021, Plaintiff filed his Complaint with the Court. See ECF No. 1. Defendants were served with the Complaint on April 26, 2021, and proof of service was filed with the Court. See ECF Nos. 9 & 10. To date, Defendants have neither answered the Complaint, nor otherwise appeared in this action. In light of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED that any motion for default judgment shall be filed, in accordance with the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases (available at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-jesse-m-furman), no later than June 4, 2021. Defendant shall file any opposition to the motion for default judgment no later than June 11, 2021. Defendants are cautioned that a corporation and a partnership may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel, see Lattanzio v. COMTA, 481 F.3d 137, 140 (2d Cir. 2007); Grace v. Bank Leumi Tr. Co. of N.Y., 443 F.3d 180, 192 (2d Cir. 2006), and where a corporation or a partnership "repeatedly fails to appear by counsel, a default judgment may be entered against it," Grace, 443 F.3d at 192 (internal quotation marks omitted). If a motion for default judgment is filed, it is further ORDERED that Defendants appear and show cause before this Court, Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York, on June 23, 2021, at 4:45 p.m., why an order should not be issued granting a default judgment against Defendants. Prior to that date, Plaintiff must file the proposed default judgment order electronically, using the ECF Filing Event "Proposed Default Judgment," for the Clerk's approval. In the event that any Defendant appears or opposes the motion for default judgment prior to that date, the parties shall prepare to treat that conference as the initial pretrial conference with respect to any such appearing Defendant. That is, if any Defendant appears, opposes the motion, or seeks a nunc pro tunc extension of time to respond to the complaint, then the parties including any such appearing Defendant shall follow the pre-conference procedures specified in the Court's Order of DATE including by submitting a joint letter addressing certain topics and a proposed case management plan no later than the Thursday prior to the conference and by participating in an early mediation session at least two weeks prior to the conference. See ECF No. 5. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff serve Defendants via overnight courier (1) with a copy of this Order within one business day of the date of this Order; and (2) with a copy of the motion for default judgment and all supporting papers within one business day of the date of any such motion. In each case, within two business days of service, Plaintiff must file proof of such service on the docket. Finally, it is ORDERED that the initial pretrial conference previously scheduled for July 21, 2021 is adjourned sine die. SO ORDERED. (Show Cause Hearing set for 6/23/2021 at 04:45 PM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.), ( Motions due by 6/4/2021., Responses due by 6/11/2021) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/21/2021) (kv)
|
| Filing 10 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Summons and Complaint. J & E Hair Salon Inc. served on 4/26/2021, answer due 5/17/2021. Service was accepted by Sue Zouky, Authorized Agent in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of New York. Document filed by Ricardo Velasquez..(Weitz, Ben-Zion) |
| Filing 9 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Summons and Complaint. Partnership 92 West, L.P. served on 4/26/2021, answer due 5/17/2021. Service was accepted by Sue Zouky, Authorized Agent in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of New York. Document filed by Ricardo Velasquez..(Weitz, Ben-Zion) |
| Filing 8 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to J & E Hair Salon Inc...(pc) |
| Filing 7 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Partnership 92 West, L.P...(pc) |
|
Filing 6
MEDIATION REFERRAL ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that this case is referred for mediation to the Court-annexed Mediation Program. The parties are hereby notified that Local Rule 83.9 shall govern the mediation and are directed to participate in the mediation in good faith. The mediation should take place at least two weeks prior to the Initial Pretrial Conference, which is currently scheduled (by separate Order to be entered today) for July 21, 2021. The mediation will have no effect upon any scheduling Order issued by this Court without leave of this Court. SO ORDERED. Please reference the following when corresponding with the Mediation Office. E-mail MediationOffice@nysd.uscourts.gov, telephone (212) 805-0643, and facsimile (212) 805-0647. Mediator to be Assigned by 4/12/2021. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/31/2021) (ks)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER REGARDING EARLY MEDIATION AND THE INITIAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE: Initial Conference set for 7/21/2021 at 04:30 PM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/31/2021) (ks)
|
| Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (pc) |
| CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(pc) |
| Case Designated ECF. (pc) |
| Filing 4 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to PARTNERSHIP 92 WEST, L.P., re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Ricardo Velasquez..(Weitz, Ben-Zion) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to J & E HAIR SALON INC., re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Ricardo Velasquez..(Weitz, Ben-Zion) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Weitz, Ben-Zion) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against J & E Hair Salon Inc., Partnership 92 West, L.P.. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-24328992)Document filed by Ricardo Velasquez..(Weitz, Ben-Zion) |
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 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.
