Pateman v. The City of White Plains et al
| Charles M. Pateman |
| The City of White Plains, LaValle Larrier, Paul Wenzel, Edwin Robinson and John Does 1-10 |
| 7:2017cv06156 |
| August 15, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Kenneth M. Karas |
| 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
147
ORDER: The Court has been informed that the Parties have reached a settlement in principle in this case. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this action is dismissed without costs and without prejudice to restoring the action to the Courts cal endar, provided the application to restore the action is made within thirty (30) days of this Order. Any application to reopen filed after thirty (30) days from the date of this Order may be denied solely on that basis. Any pending motions are DISMISSED as moot, and all conferences are CANCELED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 1/31/2022) (jca)
|
|
Filing
139
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 128 Motion in Limine; dismissing with prejudice 133 Motion in Limine. On December 22, 2021, Defendants filed their onmibus motion in limine, which contains five separate branches. (Docs. 128-130). O n January 6, 2022, Plaintiff filed his opposition. (Docs. 133-134). For the reasons set forth on the record: (I) Defendant's motion to preclude Dr. Sandra Carniciu, Dr. Jozef Debiec, Dr. Keyur Thakar, and Mr. Lany Torrisi, LCSW from testifying a s witnesses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(C) is GRANTED without opposition from Plaintiff; (2) Defendant's motion to preclude Dr. Shameela Chorny, Dr. John Robbins, Dr. Eric Spencer, and Dr. Steven Sullivan from testifying as wi tnesses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(C) is DENIED; (3) Defendant's motion to preclude Dr. Sandeep Gulati from testifying at trial is GRANTED without opposition from Plaintiff; (4) Defendant's motion to preclude Dr. Keyur T hakar from offering forensic science opinions is GRANTED without opposition from Plaintiff; (5) Defendant's motion to preclude Plaintiff from recovering economic loss damages is DENIED; and (6) Plaintiffs Sixth Claim for Relief (Negligence) as a sserted against Defendant City of White Plains, to the extent it is asserted under a failure-to-supervise the01y of liability, is dismissed with prejudice on consent of Plaintiff. A joint pretrial order was filed by the parties on June 29, 2020 and s o-oredered on March 1, 2021. (Doc. 94; Doc. 118). For the reasons set forth on the record, by January 21, 2022, the parties are directed to meet and confer and file a revised joint pretrial order containing the following revisions as further set fort h herein. By January 14, 2022 at 5:00 p.m., the parties are directed to meet and confer and file a joint summary of the case. On January 6, 2022, the parties filed their Revised Joint Proposed Jury Voir Dire. (Doc. 136-1 ). As set forth on the reco rd, the following portions of the Revised Joint Proposed Jury Voir Dire are DENIED: Defendant's proposed Introductory Statement (pp. 1-2) and Questions 12, 18, 23, 37-39, 41. The following portions of the Revised Joint Proposed Jury Voir Dire ar e GRANTED: Questions 29-32. The remainder of the questions contained in the Revised Joint Proposed Jury Voir Dire are GRANTED IN SUBSTANCE. At the conference, the Court provided the parties with copies of its voir dire questionnaire. To the extent th e parties have any objections to the questions contained therein, the parties shall notify the Court of such objections by January 14, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. The parties are now on five-days trial notice. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion sequences pending at Doc. 128 and Doc. 133. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 1/13/2022) (kv)
|
|
Filing
127
ORDER: The Clerk's Office has now notified the Court that this case has been scheduled as the primary back up case for January 19, 2022. The case will proceed if the primary case does not go forward. The case must therefore be trial ready for that date. As soon as the Court confirms whether the matter will proceed during the week of January 19, 2022, it will inform the parties. If the case cannot proceed during the week of January 19, 2022, the Court will seek another jury trial date for as soon as possible thereafter. A final pretrial conference is scheduled for January 12, 2022 at 4:00 p.m. in a courtroom to be determined. All members of the public, including attorneys, appearing at a Southern District of New York courth ouse must complete a questionnaire and have their temperature taken before being allowed entry into the courthouse. On the day that you are due to arrive at the courthouse, click on the following weblink: https://app.certify.me/SDNYPublic. Follo w the instructions and fill out the questionnaire. If your answers meet the requirements for entry, you will be sent a QR code to be used as the SDNY entry device at the courthouse entrance. SO ORDERED. (Ready for Trial by 1/19/2022., Final Pretrial Conference set for 1/12/2022 at 04:00 PM before Judge Philip M. Halpern.) (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 12/22/2021) (jca)
|
|
Filing
125
ORDER: The parties are directed to meet and confer and submit proposed joint voir dire in compliance with the Courts Individual Practices Rule 6.B. (revised 11/18/2021) by December 22, 2021. Further, motions in limine, if any, shall be filed by De cember 22, 2021, with opposition filed by January 6, 2022. The foregoing documents in Word format should contemporaneously be e-mailed to HalpernNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to strike document numbers 100 and 101 from the docket. SO ORDERED. (Motions due by 12/22/2021., Responses due by 1/6/2022) (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 12/1/2021) (jca)
|
|
Filing
117
ORDER terminating 111 Letter Motion to Stay; terminating 115 Letter Motion to Stay. By Order dated January 12, 2021, the Court directed the parties to submit their trial availability for the second quarter of 2021. (Doc. 110). On February 5 , 2021, Defendants notified the Court that Defendant Wenzel will be on an active military assignment until September 2021 and requested that a trial date be scheduled for September 2021, at the earliest. (Doc. 111). Plaintiff filed opposition to D efendant's letter on February 10, 2021( Doc. 115) and Defendants filed a reply that same day (Doc. 116). The Court will submit a jury panel request form for the fourth quarter of 2021. Accordingly, the parties shall submit, by August 2, 2021, a letter notifying the Court of any dates that the parties are unavailable for trial between October 1, 2021 and December 31, 2021. The Clerk is instructed to terminate ECF Nos. 111 and 115. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 2/11/2021) (jca)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER denying 112 FIRST LETTER MOTION to Stay opposition. Application denied. See Doc. 113. The Clerk is directed to terminate ECF No. 112. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 2/9/2021) (jca)
|
|
Filing
108
ORDER: On September 16, 2020, the parties informed the Court that they wished to proceed to trial during the week of February 8, 2021. The Court accordingly requested a jury trial for that week and this case was initially scheduled as the second back-up case for February 10, 2021. However, on January 5, 2021 Chief Judge McMahon issued a First Amended Standing Order (M-10-468), which, in light of the ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic, adjourned all trials scheduled between January 19, 2021 and Feb ruary 12, 2021. Thus, the Court will request a new jury trial for the second quarter of 2021. Accordingly, the parties are directed to jointly submit, by January 11, 2021, a letter notifying the Court of any dates that the parties are unavailable between April 1, 2021 and June 30, 2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 1/7/2021) (ks)
|
|
Filing
96
ORDER granting 95 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. The telephonic pre-motion conference scheduled for July 14, 2020 is adjourned until July 17, 2020 at 12:00 p.m. The parties shall inform the Court by July 14, 2020 if the conferenc e is necessary to resolve the parties' dispute. Additionally, the parties' request for an extension of time to file joint jury instructions and a verdict form is granted. The parties shall file these documents by August 31, 2020. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 7/6/2020) (ks)
|
|
Filing
93
ORDER granting 91 Letter Motion for Discovery. The Court directs the parties to meet and confer on this issue by July 7, 2020. By July 9, 2020, the parties shall submit a joint letter via ECF to inform the Court whether the Court's inter vention is required. If, after the meet and confer, the parties determine that the Court's intervention is required, the Court shall hold a pre-motion conference on July 14, 2020 at 12:00 p.m. At the time of the scheduled conference, all parties shall call (888) 398-2342; access code: 3456831. The Clerk is instructed to terminate ECF No. 91.. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 6/10/2020) (ks) Modified on 6/29/2020 (ks).
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER. This matter has recently been reassigned to me. The parties are instructed to consult Rule 6(A) of my Individual Practices and are directed to submit a Joint Pretrial Order by June 29, 2020. SO ORDERED. (Pretrial Order due by 6/29/2020.) (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 4/29/2020) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
83
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER re: 63 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Paul Wenzel, Edward Robinson, The City of White Plains, LaValle Larrier. For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment with respect to Plaintiff's claims of (1) excessive force against Larrier and Wenzel as it relates to the moments of Plaintiff's initial arrest; (2) excessive force and failure to intervene against Robinson; (3) deliberate indifference to medical car e against Larrier, Wenzel, and Robinson; (4) supervisory liability against Larrier and Robinson; (5) state-law negligence as it relates to excessive force other than the handcuffing of Plaintiff by Larrier and Wenzel; and (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress against all Defendants. The Court denies Defendants' Motion with respect to Plaintiff's claims of (1) excessive force against Larrier and Wenzel as it relates to Plaintiffs alleged fall and handcuffing; (2) state-la w assault and battery against White Plains, Larrier, and Wenzel; and (3) state-law negligence against White Plains, Larrier, and Wenzel for the handcuffing of Plaintiff and against White Plains, Larrier, Wenzel, and Robinson for alleged delay in and denial of medical treatment. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motion. (Dkt. No. 63.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 3/25/2020) (jca)
|
|
Filing
81
OPINION AND ORDER re: 63 MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by Paul Wenzel, Edward Robinson, The City of White Plains, LaValle Larrier. For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment wit h respect to Plaintiff's claims of (1) excessive force against Larrier and Wenzel as it relates to the moments of Plaintiff's initial arrest; (2) excessive force and failure to intervene against Robinson; (3) deliberate indifference to me dical care against Larrier, Wenzel, and Robinson; (4) supervisory liability against Larrier and Robinson; (5) state-law negligence as it relates to excessive force other than the handcuffing of Plaintiff by Larrier and Wenzel; and (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress against all Defendants. The Court denies Defendants' Motion with respect to Plaintiff's claims of (1) excessive force against Larrier and Robinson as it relates to Plaintiff's alleged fall and handcuf fing; (2) state-law assault and battery against White Plains, Larrier, and Wenzel; and (3) state-law negligence against White Plains, Larrier, and Wenzel for the handcuffing of Plaintiff and against White Plains, Larrier, Wenzel, and Robinson for alleged delay in and denial of medical treatment. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motion. (Dkt. No. 63.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 3/19/2020) (jca)
|
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.
