Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Ostrofsky v. Dep't of Rehabilitation

August 23, 2010

LINDA OSTROFSKY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

AMENDED STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER*fn1

READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT CONTAINS IMPORTANT DATES WHICH THE COURT WILL STRICTLY ENFORCE AND WITH WHICH ALL COUNSEL AND PARTIES MUST COMPLY. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN THE IMPOSITION OF MONETARY AND ALL OTHER SANCTIONS WITHIN THE POWER OF THE COURT, INCLUDING DISMISSAL OR AN ORDER OF JUDGMENT.

This action proceeds before the undersigned for all pretrial scheduling and proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 73; Local Rules 301, 302. Plaintiff filed a status report on July 29, 2010. (Dkt. No. 53.) Defendants filed a status report on July 28, 2010. (Dkt. No. 52.) Having concluded that oral argument would not materially assist the court, the undersigned hereby submits the issue on the reports and record on file. See E. Dist. Local Rule 230(g). Accordingly, in consideration of the parties' status reports, the court enters the following scheduling order: NATURE OF CASE

Plaintiff's fourth amended complaint, filed December 24, 2009, alleges employment discrimination and retaliation based on a disability. (Dkt. No. 42.) Plaintiff alleges that she was subjected to a series of personnel-related decisions by her supervisors which she alleges were discriminatory. Defendants deny the allegations and claim that plaintiff's causes of action are barred by the statute of limitations and failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Defendants further contend that any actions taken were nondiscriminatory and in the legitimate exercise of managerial discretion.

SERVICE OF PROCESS

Service of process has been made on all defendants. After a series of amendments to plaintiff's complaint, defendants answered the complaint on April 2, 2010. (Dkt. No. 50.)

JOINDER OF PARTIES/AMENDMENTS

No further joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings is permitted except with leave of court and upon good cause shown.

JURISDICTION/VENUE

Jurisdiction and venue are undisputed and are hereby found to be proper. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331; 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).*fn2

MOTION HEARING SCHEDULES

All law and motion, except as to discovery-related matters, shall be completed by November 17, 2011. The word "completed" in this context means that all law and motion matters must be heard by the above date. Counsel (and/or pro se parties)*fn3 are cautioned to refer to the Local Rules regarding the requirements for noticing such motions on the court's regularly scheduled law and motion calendar. This paragraph does not preclude motions for continuances, temporary restraining orders or other emergency applications, and is subject to any special scheduling set forth in the "MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS" paragraph below.

The parties should keep in mind that the purpose of law and motion is to narrow and refine the legal issues raised by the case and to dispose of by pretrial motion those issues that are susceptible to resolution without trial. To accomplish that purpose, the parties need to identify and fully research the issues presented by the case, and then examine those issues in light of the evidence obtained through discovery. If it appears to counsel after examining the legal issues and facts that an issue can be ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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