Stewart v. Davis et al
| Shawn Stewart |
| Stephanie Davis and Brian Hirschman |
| 1:2022cv03583 |
| May 3, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Analisa Torres |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER: To protect the public health, while promoting the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding," Fed. R. Civ. P. 1, it is ORDERED pursuant to Rules 30(b)(3) and 30(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that all depositions in this action may be taken via telephone, videoconference, or other remote means. It is further ORDERED pursuant to Rule 30(b)(5) that a deposition will be deemed to have taken place "before an officer appointed or designated under Rule 28" if such officer attends the deposition using the same remote means used to connect all other participants, so long as all participants (including the officer) can clearly hear and be heard by all other participants. The parties are encouraged to engage in discovery through remote means at every available opportunity. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 5/9/2022) (kv)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER: To conserve resources, to promote judicial efficiency, and in an effort to achieve a faster disposition of this matter, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties discuss whether they are willing to consent, under 28 U.S.C. 636(c), to conducting all further proceedings before the assigned Magistrate Judge. (as further set forth herein). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 5/9/2022) (kv)
|
|
Filing 8
INITIAL PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Counsel for all parties are directed to submit a joint letter and a jointly proposed Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order by November 1, 2022, in accordance with Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the instructions set forth below. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 5/9/2022) (kv)
|
| NOTICE OF PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL CIVIL RULE 83.10 (FORMERLY THE SECTION 1983 PLAN) : Unless otherwise ordered, this case shall participate in the Southern District of New York's Local Civil Rule 83.10. Please reference the Court's website, www.nysd.uscourts.gov, to review Local Civil Rule 83.10, updated 4/1/2015, for important information.(jpt) |
| Filing 7 COMPLAINT against Stephanie Davis, Brian Hirschman. Document filed by Shawn Stewart..(Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 6 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Brian Hirschman..(sj) |
| Filing 5 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Stephanie Davis. (sj) |
| Case Designated ECF. (sj) |
| Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein 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. (sj) |
| ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT PLEADING. Notice to Attorney Andrew Brian Stoll to RE-FILE Document No. #1 Complaint. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): the All Defendant radio button was selected; the wrong party/parties whom the pleading is against were selected; the pleading was not signed. Re-file the pleading using the event type Complaint found under the event list Complaints and Other Initiating Documents - attach the correct signed PDF - select the individually named filer/filers - select the individually named party/parties the pleading is against. (sj) |
| ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING CIVIL. CASE OPENING STATISTICAL ERROR CORRECTION: Notice to attorney Andrew Brian Stoll. The following case opening statistical information was erroneously selected/entered: County code Bronx. The following correction(s) have been made to your case entry: the County code has been modified to Kings. (sj) |
| ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Andrew Brian Stoll. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Stephanie Davis, Brian Hirschman. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party text was omitted. (sj) |
| CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Analisa Torres. 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..(sj) |
| Filing 4 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Police Officer Brian Hirschman, Shield # 22623, re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Shawn Stewart..(Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Police Officer Stephanie Davis, Shield # 28218, re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Shawn Stewart..(Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Stoll, Andrew) |
| Filing 1 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT PLEADING - FILED AGAINST PARTY ERROR COMPLAINT against All Defendants. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-26096883)Document filed by Shawn Stewart..(Stoll, Andrew) Modified on 5/4/2022 (sj). |
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.
