Jimenez-Fogarty v. Fogarty et al
| Sai Malena Jimenez |
| Lisa Zeiderman, Thomas Fogarty, Ashley Kersting, Judge Sherri Eisenpress, Judge Thomas Zugibe, Laura Marino and Nicole Digiacomo |
| 1:2024cv08705 |
| November 15, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Gabriel W Gorenstein |
| Jennifer L Rochon |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ra Fed. Question: Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 8, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 43
ORDER re: #42 Letter filed by Thomas Fogarty. Granted. Opposition due January 21, 2025. Reply due February 3, 2025. (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein) (Text Only Order) (Gorenstein, Gabriel)
|
| Filing 42 LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein from Brian L. Gardner dated January 8, 2025 re: Request for Extension of Time. Document filed by Thomas Fogarty..(Gardner, Brian) |
|
Filing 41
MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: #40 Letter,, filed by Sai Malena Jimenez. ENDORSEMENT: The deadline for the filing of the amended complaint as stated in Docket # 30 is extended to January 16, 2025. In the future, plaintiff will be expected to comply with paragraph 1.E of the Court's Individual Practices before making any applications for an extension. So Ordered. ( Amended Pleadings due by 1/16/2025.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein on 1/8/2025) (sgz)
|
| Filing 40 LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein from Sai Malena Jimenez Fogarty dated 1/6/2025 re: I am writing to respectfully request a one-week extension to file the modification of complaint in the above-referenced case, which is currently due on January 9, 2024. Unfortunately, I have encountered an unforeseen medical issue that requires immediate attention and surgery, which will prevent me from completing the necessary work on time.. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty..(nd) |
|
Filing 39
MEMO ENDORSEMENT granting #33 Motion for Permission for Electronic Case Filing. ENDORSEMENT: Granted. So Ordered. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein on 1/2/2025) (sgz)
|
| Filing 38 LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein from Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty dated 12/27/2024 re: The purpose of this letter is to clarify certain matters that have recently arisen. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit Exhibit 3). (tp) |
|
Filing 35
ORDER with respect to #34 Motion to Disqualify Counsel. Accordingly, the Court's pre-motion conference requirement is waived. Any opposition to the motion shall be filed by January 10, 2025. Any reply to the motion shall be filed by January 22, 2025. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein on 12/26/2024) (sgz)
|
| Set/Reset Deadlines as to #34 MOTION to Disqualify Counsel. Responses due by 1/10/2025 Replies due by 1/22/2025. (sgz) |
| Filing 37 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY COLE SCHOTZ P.C. AS COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT THOMAS FOGARTY. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Part 1, #2 Exhibit Part 2).(rro) |
| Filing 32 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Siobhan A. Mueller on behalf of Nicole Digiacomo..(Mueller, Siobhan) |
| Filing 31 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Richard Winston Boone, Jr on behalf of Nicole Digiacomo..(Boone, Richard) |
|
Filing 30
ORDER withdrawing #11 Motion to Dismiss; rendering moot #27 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Plaintiff's request (Docket # 28) for an extension of the deadline to file an amended complaint is granted. The amended complaint shall be filed by January 9, 2025. Of course, plaintiff must ensure that any information or material covered by Docket # 10 is either redacted or omitted from the amended complaint. Plaintiff shall file proof of service compliant with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)(1) as to each defendant served. Plaintiff's stated intention to file the amended complaint effectively renders moot the request for an extension contained in Docket #27. The deadline for any party to respond to the original complaint is adjourned sine die. The deadline for all defendants either to file an answer to the amended complaint or to file a letter requesting permission to make a motion to dismiss the amended complaint is hereby extended as set forth in the Order. In light of the planned filing of the amended complaint, the motion to dismiss filed by Lisa Zeiderman and Ashley Kersting (Docket # 11) is deemed withdrawn without prejudice. Thus, plaintiff should not respond to this motion. Finally, the parties need take no action with respect to the holding of a conference as set forth in the Order filed December 19, 2024 (Docket # 26). The Court will file an Order on the public docket in the event it schedules a conference. As further set forth in the Order.. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein on 12/20/24) (Gorenstein, Gabriel)
|
| Filing 29 LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein from Brett A. Scher dated 12-20-24 re: Response to Order of Reference dated 12-19-24. Document filed by Lisa Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting..(Scher, Brett) |
| Filing 36 LETTER from Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty dated 12/19/2024 re: The deadline was 12/16/2024 and I emailed on that day, however it has not be uploaded yet.. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty..(nb) |
| Filing 34 MOTION to Disqualify Cole Schotz P.C. as counsel for Thomas Fogarty. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Main Document) (sac) |
| Filing 33 MOTION for Permission for Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty to participate in electronic case filing in this case. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (sac) |
| Filing 28 LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein from Sai Malena Jimenez Fogarty dated 12/19/2024 re: I am writing to you in compliance with the Order of Reference to a Magistrate Judge issued by the Honorable Judge Jennifer L. Rochon in the above-referenced case, directing the parties to contact your Chambers no later than December 23, 2024, to determine if any conference is requested by Your Honor. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (jjc) |
| Filing 27 FIRST LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer addressed to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein from Brian L. Gardner dated December 19, 2024. Document filed by Thomas Fogarty. Return Date set for 1/25/2024 at 05:00 PM..(Gardner, Brian) |
|
Filing 26
ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement) and Dispositive Motion (i.e., motion requiring a Report and Recommendation). Referred to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein. The parties are directed to contact the Chambers of Magistrate Judge Gorenstein no later than December 23, 2024 to determine if any conference is requested by the MJ. Motions referred to Gabriel W. Gorenstein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 12/19/2024) (jca)
|
| Filing 25 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Courtney Hindin on behalf of Thomas Fogarty..(Hindin, Courtney) |
|
Filing 24
ORDER denying #20 Motion to Disqualify Counsel; denying #21 Motion For the reasons set forth in the Court's December 12, 2024 Order, Dkt. 20, Plaintiff's motion to disqualify Defendant Thomas Fogarty's attorneys at Miller Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting and Lisa Zeiderman, from representing him in this case, is DENIED. Plaintiff's request for relief due to retaliatory actions by Defendant Fogarty is likewise denied. Dkt. 20. To the extent that Plaintiff asserts that Fogarty engaged in retaliatory actions by denying Plaintiff access to her children during holidays and other designated visitations days and/or by disregarding her children's well-being by sending them for visits without proper coats, Plaintiff should raise those concerns in the ongoing matrimonial proceedings. To the extent that Plaintiff asserts that Defendant has engaged in a clear and unlawful violation of a Confidential Address Court Order, that Order applied only to proceedings in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Rockland County. See Dkt. 20, Ex. 3. The Court denies Plaintiff's request for the immediate incarceration of Fogarty. Her claims of retaliatory conduct have not been sufficiently pleaded and, in any event, incarceration is not a remedy for a civil retaliation claim. Moreover, neither the FLSA nor Title VII apply here because Defendant Fogarty and Plaintiff are not alleged to be in an employee-employer relationship. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motions at Dkts. 20 and 21. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 12/17/2024) (jca)
|
| Filing 23 LETTER addressed to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon from Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty dated 12/16/2024 re: I am writing to respectfully seek clarification from the Court regarding the motion to dismiss filed by opposing counsel representing the Zeiderman defendants on December 9, 2024 as further set forth herein. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (tp) |
|
Filing 22
ORDER For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Application for the Court to Request Counsel is DENIED. If the Court ultimately determines that her complaint is "likely to be of substance," the application may be revisited. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 12/13/2024) (jca)
|
|
Filing 19
ORDER The Clerk of Court is directed to provide viewing access to Dkt Nos. 1, 13, and 15 to counsel for Defendant Thomas Fogarty, Brian L. Gardner. The Clerk of Court is further directed to grant viewing access for all sealed docket entries to all case participants. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 12/12/2024) (jca)
|
| Filing 21 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELIEF DUE TO RETALIATORY ACTIONS BY DEFENDANT THOMAS FOGARTY. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (ar) |
| Filing 20 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (ar) |
|
Filing 18
ORDER The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff's December 9, 2024 letter. Dkt. 17. Plaintiffs request for an extension to re-file her Complaint with appropriate redactions of personally identifying and other confidential information, consistent with the Court's December 9, 2024 Order, Dkt. 10, is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall re-file her Complaint by December 16, 2024. Plaintiff also seeks the removal of Miller Zeiderman as counsel for Thomas Fogarty, citing a conflict of interest. Miller Zeiderman is not, however, acting as Mr. Fogartys counsel in this matter. Mr. Fogarty is represented by Brian L. Gardner of Cole Schotz P.C. Attorneys Lisa Zeiderman and Ashley Kersting have only appeared in this matter in their capacity as Named Defendants. Plaintiff's request to disqualify Miller Zeiderman as counsel for Thomas Fogarty in this case is therefore denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 12/12/2024) (jca)
|
| Filing 17 LETTER addressed to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon from Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty dated 12/9/2024 re: I respectfully submit this letter to address critical matters in my federal RICO civil case, which I have initiated as the plaintiff. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty. (sac) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Brian L. Gardner on behalf of Thomas Fogarty..(Gardner, Brian) |
| Filing 15 ***SELECTED PARTIES*** MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: #11 MOTION to Dismiss . (Unredacted). Document filed by Lisa Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting, Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty, Thomas Fogarty, Nicole Digiacomo, Sherri Eisenpress, Thomas Zugibe, Laura Marino. Motion or Order to File Under Seal: #7 .(Scher, Brett) |
| Filing 14 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: #11 MOTION to Dismiss . (Redacted). Document filed by Lisa Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting..(Scher, Brett) |
| Filing 13 ***SELECTED PARTIES***DECLARATION of Brett A. Scher in Support re: #11 MOTION to Dismiss .. Document filed by Lisa Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting, Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty, Thomas Fogarty, Nicole Digiacomo, Sherri Eisenpress, Thomas Zugibe, Laura Marino. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Complaint (Part 1 of 2), #2 Exhibit A - Complaint (Part 2 of 2))Motion or Order to File Under Seal: #7 .(Scher, Brett) |
| Filing 12 DECLARATION of Brett A. Scher in Support re: #11 MOTION to Dismiss .. Document filed by Lisa Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Complaint (Placeholder Page)).(Scher, Brett) |
| Filing 11 MOTION to Dismiss . Document filed by Lisa Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting..(Scher, Brett) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER denying #6 Letter Motion to Seal Therefore, given the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents, Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 119-20, the Court denies the request to seal the entire docket. However, Plaintiffs' Complaint includes sensitive and confidential information from ongoing matrimonial proceedings, including children's names, photographs, and personally identifiable information and her ex-husband's personally identifiable and other confidential information. That is information that should be redacted pursuant to Rule 5.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs Complaint also appends numerous court filings and orders from the ongoing matrimonial proceedings that Defendants have represented were filed confidentially under seal. Ltr. at 1. Therefore, consistent with this Courts November 26, 2024 Order and the Court's Individual Rules of Practice, the parties shall meet and confer to try to narrow the scope of Defendants request to seal, including through proposed redactions to the Complaint. By no later than December 13, 2024, Plaintiff must make appropriate redactions of personally identifying and other confidential information, as required by Rule 5.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and re-file the entire Complaint in redacted form on the public docket. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 12/6/2024) (jca)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER Per the Court's November 26, 2024 Order, Plaintiff's response, if any, to Defendants' letter-motion to seal was due by November 28, 2024. Dkt. 7. To date, the Court has received no response. As a courtesy, the Court shall grant an extension for Plaintiff to file her reply until December 4, 2024. SO ORDERED. (Responses due by 12/4/2024) (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 12/2/2024) (jca)
|
| Filing 9 LETTER addressed to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon from Sai Malena Jimenez Fogarty dated 11/27/2024 re: Response to Defendant's Letter Motion to Seal. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty.(tp) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER with respect to #6 Letter Motion to Seal The Court is in receipt of Defendants Lisa Zeiderman and Ashley Kersting (collectively, the "Zeiderman Defendants")s requests to seal the docket, or in the alternative, to file their forthcoming motions to dismiss under seal. Per the Court's local rules, Defendants should meet with Plaintiff to attempt to narrow the scope of their request. Moreover, Plaintiff shall file her response, if any, to Defendants' letter-motion to seal by November 28, 2024. Consistent with Local Rule 4(B), the Zeiderman Defendants are instructed to file their forthcoming motions to dismiss with proposed redactions in public view. The publicly filed motions should redact any confidential information sought to be filed under seal. The proposed sealed documents must be contemporaneously filed under seal on ECF and electronically related to the motion. The summary docket text, but not the sealed document, will be open to public inspection and should not include confidential information sought to be filed under seal. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to temporarily seal the Complaint at Dkt. 1 pending the Court's final determination on Defendants' letter-motion to seal. The viewing of Dkt. 1 shall be restricted to the parties listed on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 11/26/2024) (jca)
|
| Filing 6 LETTER MOTION to Seal Docket addressed to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon from Brett A. Scher dated November 25, 2024. Document filed by Lisa Zeiderman, Ashley Kersting..(Scher, Brett) |
|
Filing 5
STANDING ORDER IN RE CASES FILED BY PRO SE PLAINTIFFS (See 24-MISC-127 Standing Order filed March 18, 2024). To ensure that all cases heard in the Southern District of New York are handled promptly and efficiently, all parties must keep the court apprised of any new contact information. It is a party's obligation to provide an address for service; service of court orders cannot be accomplished if a party does not update the court when a change of address occurs. Accordingly, all self-represented litigants are hereby ORDERED to inform the court of each change in their address or electronic contact information. Parties may #consent to electronic service to receive notifications of court filings by email, rather than relying on regular mail delivery. Parties may also ask the court for #permission to file documents electronically. Forms, including instructions for consenting to electronic service and requesting permission to file documents electronically, may be found by clicking on the hyperlinks in this order, or by accessing the forms on the courts website, nysd.uscourts.gov/forms. The procedures that follow apply only to cases filed by pro se plaintiffs. If the court receives notice from the United States Postal Service that an order has been returned to the court, or otherwise receives information that the address of record for a self-represented plaintiff is no longer valid, the court may issue an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with this order. Such order will be sent to the plaintiffs last known address and will also be viewable on the court's electronic docket. A notice directing the parties' attention to this order shall be docketed (and mailed to any self-represented party that has appeared and has not consented to electronic service) upon the opening of each case or miscellaneous matter that is classified as pro se in the court's records. (Signed by Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/18/2024) (tro)
|
| CASE MANAGEMENT NOTE: For each electronic filing made in a case involving a self-represented party who has not consented to electronic service, the filing party must serve the document on such self-represented party in a manner permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2) (other than through the ECF system) and file proof of service for each document so served. Please see #Rule 9.2 of the courts ECF Rules & Instructions for further information..(tro) |
| Filing 4 PRO SE CONSENT TO RECEIVE ELECTRONIC SERVICE. The following party: Sai Malena Jimenez consents to receive electronic service via the ECF system. Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty.(tro) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS ISSUED as to Nicole Digiacomo, Sherri Eisenpress, Thomas Fogarty, Ashley Kersting, Laura Marino, Lisa Zeiderman, Thomas Zugibe. (tro) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (tro) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Nicole Digiacomo, Sherri Eisenpress, Thomas Fogarty, Ashley Kersting, Laura Marino, Lisa Zeiderman, Thomas Zugibe. (Filing Fee $ 405.00, Receipt Number 34619)Document filed by Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty.(tro) |
| Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein is designated to handle matters that may be referred in this case. 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. (tro) |
| Case Designated ECF. (tro) |
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.
