National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Spring Valley Branch et al v. East Ramapo Central School District et al
| National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Spring Valley Branch, Julio Clerveaux, Chevon Dos Reis, Eric Goodwin, Jose Vitelio Gregorio, Dorothy Miller, Hillary Moreau and Washington Sanchez |
| East Ramapo Central School District and MaryEllen Elia |
| 7:2017cv08943 |
| November 16, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Cathy Seibel |
| Voting |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1973 |
| None |
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
718
AMENDED REMEDIAL ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 1. Beginning with the trnstee election to be held on May 17, 2022, the East Ramapo Central School Distri ct ("District") is ORDERED to implementthe ward boundaries below and attached in Exhibit 1. 2. It is FURTHER ORDERED that, the October 14, 2020 Remedial Order remains in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with the updated ward boundaries ordered herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 2/2/2022) (mml)
|
|
Filing
710
AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT amending 694 Judgment. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 1. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiffs for a fee award in the amount of $5,446,139.99 plus daily interest following March 30, 2021, at the prevailing statutory post-judgment interest rate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1961. Defendants shall pay the award plus accrued interest to Plaintiffs on or before October 15, 2021. 2. The District may satisfy the judgment by making one payment of $4,392,394.95 plus accrued interest to Latham & Watkins LLP, and a second payment of $1,053,745.04 plus accrued interest to the New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation, or as otherwise instructed by Plaintiffs' counsel. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 7/23/2021) (mml) Modified on 7/23/2021 (mml).
|
|
Filing
694
JUDGMENT: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 1. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiffs for a fee award in the amount of $5,446,139.99 plus daily interest following March 30, 2021, at the prevailing statutory post-judgment interest rate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1961. Defendants shall pay the award plus accrued interest to Plaintiffs on or before October 15, 2021. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 3/30/2021) (mml)
|
|
Filing
671
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: re: 598 MOTION for Attorney Fees and Costs filed by Hillary Moreau, Julio Clerveaux, Jose Vitelio Gregorio, Chevon Dos Reis, Eric Goodwin, Dorothy Miller, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Spring Valley Branch. For the foregoing reasons, I respectfully recommend that Plaintiffs' motion be granted in part and denied in part, and that Plaintiffs' counsel be awarded $3,714,834.38 in attorneys' fees, $192,463.92 in expert fees, and $426,398.03 in costs. Objections to R&R due by 1/12/2021 (Signed by Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy on 12/29/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
664
REMEDIAL ORDER: THIS MATTER is before the Court after a bench trial. The Court, being fully advised in the premises and for the reasons stated on the record on October 9, 2020, hereby ORDERS AND ADJUDGES as follows: 1. Beginning with a special elect ion to be held on February 2, 2021, the East Ramapo Central School District ("District") is ORDERED that future elections for the District's School Board will be conducted using single-member districts, or wards; 2. It is FURTHER ORDE RED that only candidates otherwise qualified under New York Education Law who reside in a particular ward will be eligible to run for trustee of that ward; 3. It is FURTHER ORDERED that only otherwise eligible voters residing in a particular ward wi ll be eligible to vote for that ward's particular trustee and no other ward's trustee, as further set forth. 10. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Elections for board of education trustees that are held subsequent to the special election shall proceed according to the New York Education Law except as otherwise inconsistent with this Order. 11. It is FURTHER ORDERED that nothing in this order should be construed to waive, abrogate, or otherwise affect the District's pending appeal or any of its appellate rights. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 10/14/2020) (mml)
|
|
Filing
660
ORDER: Accordingly, I do not concern myself with Plaintiffs' preferences except to the extent, if any, that their objections demonstrate that Defendant's proposal will not remedy the Section 2 violation I have found. The parties shall atten d a telephonic conference on October 9, 2020 at 10 a.m. By 10 a.m. on October 7, 2020, Plaintiffs shall state by letter which of the Defendant's proposals, if any, Plaintiffs believe prevent that proposal from remedying the violation. Plaintiffs may cite authority for their positions but should not argue them. Defendant may respond, again with authority but without argument, by 2 p.m. on October 8, 2020. (Telephone Conference set for 10/9/2020 at 10:00 AM before Judge Cathy Seibel.) (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 10/5/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
576
ORDER denying 571 Motion to Stay. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's emergency motion to stay the Court's May 25, 2020 Decision and Order is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Doc. 571. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 6/1/2020) (mml)
|
|
Filing
568
DECISION AND ORDER: 87. Balancing all of the relevant factors, I find that Plaintiffs have convincingly proven their case of vote dilution. The three Gingles factors are met, and the Senate Factors weigh firmly in Plaintiffs' favor. The at-large system of electing the Board of Education of the East Ramapo Central School District affords black and Latino residents "less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representative s of their choice," Gingles, 478 U.S. at 36 (internal quotation marks omitted), in that it "thwarts a distinctive minority vote by submerging it in larger white voting population," Growe, 507 U.S. at 40. I do not address whether this r esult was intentional, as no such finding is required under Section 2. The case is made by showing that people of color feel the deleterious impact of the at-large scheme employed for Board elections and white people do not, such that the challenged practice "has operated to invidiously exclude blacks [and Latinos] from effective participation in political life in violation of Section 2." Goosby, 956 F. Supp. at 356. 88. Plaintiffs have proven that the at-large method of electing Board members in the District violates Section 2 of the VRA and that they are thus entitled to full relief. This Court enjoins the District from holding any further elections under its at-large system, including the elections currently scheduled for Jun e 9, 2020. See Wright v. Sumter Cty. Bd. of Elections & Registration, 361 F. Supp. 3d 1296, 1305-06 (M.D. Ga. 2018) (enjoining election pending redistricting), modified on other grounds, No. 14-CV-42, 2018 WL 7366461 (M.D. Ga. June 21, 2018), recons ideration denied, 2018 WL 7366501 (M.D. Ga. July 23, 2018); Arbor Hill, 281 F. Supp. 2d at 457 (same); cf. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 585-86 (1964) (court not required to enjoin imminent election where apportionment scheme found invalid, but &q uot;it would be the unusual case in which a court would be justified in not taking appropriate action to insure that no further elections are conducted under the invalid plan"). The District shall propose a remedial plan that fully complies with the VRA within thirty days of the date of this Order. See Goosby, 981 F. Supp. at 755 ("Where a court has struck down a voting system, it must give the appropriate elected body an opportunity to propose a remedial plan."); see also Pope, 94 F. Supp. 3d at 351 (affording defendant municipality "the first opportunity to create a remedial plan"). Such a remedial plan shall divide the District into nine voting wards - one for each Board seat - and require that only those reside nts living in a voting ward may vote for that ward's seat. The Court will not prescribe further details at this time except to note that as many as four majority-minority wards appear to be possible, (see paragraph 13 above), and that a special election would appear to be necessary once the remedial plan is adopted. Plaintiffs shall respond within thirty days of the date of Defendant's proposal. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that the District complies fully with the VR A and implements all steps to cure its violation. See New Rochelle Voter Def. Fund v. City of New Rochelle, 308 F. Supp. 2d 152, 163-64 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). 89. Finally, Plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys fees and costs, including expert fees,pursuant to 52 U.S.C. § 10310(e). See Pope, 94 F. Supp. 3d at 351-52. Within thirty days of the entry of this Order, Plaintiffs shall file a motion for the award of such fees and costs, unless the parties can come to an agreement on that subject. Defend ant will thereafter have thirty days to respond. * * * This ruling may or may not change the way the schools in the District are run. But the purpose of Section 2 is not to produce any particular policy outcome. Rather, it is to ensure that every vot er has equal access to the electoral process. For too long, black and Latino voters in the District have been frustrated in that most fundamental and precious endeavor. They, like their white neighbors, are entitled to have their voices heard. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 5/25/2020) (mml)
|
|
Filing
552
ORDER: Beginning March 16, 2020, all parties to civil conferences may attend by phone, using the following information: Toll-Free Number: (877) 336-1839 Access Code: 1047966 The parties should call in from a landline and announce their names before speaking. This Order is subject to revocation at any time. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 3/12/2020) (jca)
|
|
Filing
530
ORDER: On February 24, 2020, on Plaintiffs' motion, (Doc. 523), the Court found Yehuda Oshry to be in contempt of court for his failure to appear and testify at trial in the above-captioned matter.1 That same day, a warrant for Mr. Oshry' ;s arrest issued. Mr. Oshry is therefore subject to arrest at any time. If he appears at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, February 26, 2020, or Thursday, February 27, 2020, he will give his testimony and that will resolve the matter. If he does not appear on Wed nesday or Thursday, I will hold the trial record open awaiting his testimony, and he will remain subject to arrest thereafter. If upon Mr. Oshry's arrest it takes a period of days for the parties to be assembled to hear his testimony as it like ly will because the trial is otherwise expected to end on Thursday he will have to be held in custody during that period, or suitable conditions of bail that will assure his appearance will have to be satisfied. Mr. Oshry should therefore understand that if he does not appear in Courtroom 621 at 300 Quarropas Street, White Plains, New York, on Wednesday, February 26, 2020, or Thursday, February 27, 2020, he risks being incarcerated for some period of time pending his testimony The Court hopes he will want to avoid that outcome. Plaintiffs shall serve this Order on Mr. Oshry no later than February 25, 2020, by overnight express at Mr. Oshry's home and work addresses, and the Court will serve it by the same means at the home of one of Mr. Oshrys sons. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 2/25/2020) (mml)
|
|
Filing
504
ORDER: I hereby authorize Courtroom Connect, a Southern District of New York contracted vendor, to provide patties in the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Spring Valley Branch, et al. v. East Ramapo Central School Distric t, et al. 17-cv-8943 with Internet connectivity for the duration of the proceedings, set to begin on February 10, 2020 and proceed through February 20, 2020. Courtroom Connect can proceed to make proper arrangements with the District Executive Office of the Court. The approved attorneys and parties on the case as to whom the Court has entered an order under Standing Order M10-468 are allowed to bring in the necessary electronic computing devices to connect to the Courtroom Connect service. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 2/4/2020) (mml)
|
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.
