Kitani v. City Of New York
- Rochon
- 1:19-cv-01043
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Kitani v. City of New York, Judge Rochon gave Mikiko Kitani until November 20, 2024, to oppose defendants’ summary-judgment motion.
Mikiko Kitani and defendants Anthony Cassella, Craig Costa, Pierre Syldor, and New York City Transit.
What happened
In Kitani v. City of New York, defendants Anthony Cassella, Craig Costa, Pierre Syldor, and New York City Transit asked the court to grant summary judgment dismissing Mikiko Kitani’s action. Kitani was representing herself.
The court had repeatedly extended Kitani’s deadline to respond, ultimately setting November 8, 2024, as the deadline and warning that there would be no more extensions. Kitani did not file an opposition or contact the court by that date.
Judge Rochon ordered that the motion would be treated as fully submitted and unopposed if Kitani did not file her opposition by November 20, 2024. The order did not decide the summary-judgment motion or the merits of the case.
The detailed version
- Kitani v. City Of New York · No. 1:19-cv-01043
- Rochon
- Nov. 13, 2024
Background
Defendants Anthony Cassella, Craig Costa, Pierre Syldor, and New York City Transit moved for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the action brought by pro se plaintiff Mikiko Kitani. Summary judgment is a procedure for deciding a case without a trial when the governing standard is met. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
The court had previously referred the case to Magistrate Judge Netburn for settlement. After repeated adjournments, Judge Netburn scheduled a settlement conference for February 16, 2024. Kitani did not appear, and the schedule for defendants’ summary-judgment motion remained in effect.
Deadlines and filings
Defendants filed their summary-judgment motion and supporting materials after receiving extensions. Judge Netburn extended Kitani’s deadline to oppose the motion several times: first to July 8, 2024, then to August 30, September 30, and November 8. On the final extension, Judge Netburn stated that five and a half months was an unreasonable period to respond and warned that no further extensions would be granted.
Kitani did not file an opposition by November 8, 2024, and did not otherwise contact the court. The order cites prior decisions treating a motion as unopposed and fully submitted after a pro se plaintiff failed to respond following a warning.
Ruling
Judge Rochon ordered that defendants’ motion would be deemed fully submitted and unopposed if Kitani did not file her opposition by November 20, 2024. The Clerk was directed to mail the order to Kitani at her address of record, and defendants were directed to email her a copy if they had an email address for her. The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied the summary-judgment motion, and it does not decide the merits of the action.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.