Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Price v. New York Container Terminal Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


October 26, 2009

REGINA PRICE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
NEW YORK CONTAINER TERMINAL INC., DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: James Orenstein U.S. Magistrate Judge

JAMES ORENSTEIN, Magistrate Judge

ORDER

The plaintiff has filed a motion seeking the following forms of relief: a request to appear pro hac vice, an extension of time to file a response or reply to something, and approval of an infant compromise. See Docket Entry ("DE") 29. I deny the motion in its entirety as moot: the plaintiff is represented by counsel, there is nothing pending to which she must file a response or reply, and the sole plaintiff is an adult.

To the extent the letter submitted in support of the motion reveals that what the plaintiff's counsel actually wants is a last-minute adjournment of a conference scheduled over a month ago, see DE 25, on the ground that he has decided to discharge his obligation in another case rather than his obligation in this one, see DE 29, I deny the motion and remind counsel that I have previously stated I would grant no further belated requests for scheduling relief. See Order dated June 1, 2009.

I also note that the plaintiff has failed to discharge her obligation to submit an ex parte statement of her settlement position as required. See DE 12, ¶ III.b. I have previously warned the plaintiff through counsel that a "continued failure to discharge her ... litigation duties ... will result in a recommendation that the court dismiss the Complaint for failure to prosecute." Order dated July 3, 2009.

Under all of the circumstances, I conclude that the plaintiff and her counsel have made it impossible to conduct the conference I scheduled for tomorrow and that was supposed to have included a discussion of settlement. Lacking any satisfactory alternative, I will reschedule the conference to Wednesday, October 28, 2009, at 2:00 p.m. The plaintiff must appear in person along with her counsel, so that they can show cause why I should not recommend dismissal, or impose some appropriate lesser sanction on the plaintiff or her counsel. The parties must be prepared to discuss all aspects of the status of the case, and to discuss settlement in good faith. I direct the plaintiff's counsel to submit an ex parte statement of settlement position no later than 5:00 p.m. on October 27, 2009, and I direct the plaintiff's counsel to provide a copy of this order to his client forthwith.

SO ORDERED.

20091026

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.