Whitfield v. City of New York
- Jesse Furman
- 1:20-cv-04674
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Whitfield v. City of New York, Judge Furman ruled the appeal did not halt the case and reminded the parties about their upcoming pretrial conference.
John David Whitfield, the City of New York, and the other defendants are affected by the continued district-court proceedings and the scheduled initial pretrial conference.
What happened
In Whitfield v. City of New York, the court reminded the parties that an initial pretrial conference was scheduled for February 13, 2025, and that they had to discuss settlement and other required topics beforehand.
The court also reminded the parties to submit letters before the conference and provided instructions for joining by telephone. Lawyers for represented parties were told to follow the court’s teleconference rules.
Judge Jesse M. Furman ruled that John David Whitfield’s February 3 notice of appeal did not affect the district court’s jurisdiction because it challenged orders that were not final and appealable. The pretrial conference would therefore proceed.
The detailed version
- Whitfield v. City of New York · No. 1:20-cv-04674
- Jesse Furman
- Feb. 3, 2025
Proceedings and Conference Requirements
The court reminded the parties that the initial pretrial conference was scheduled for February 13, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. Before the conference, the parties had to confer about settlement and the other subjects covered by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16. Each party also had to submit a letter by the Thursday before the conference, as required by the court’s December 23, 2024 order.
The court provided telephone instructions for joining the conference. Counsel for represented parties also had to follow the court’s teleconference rules, including sending the court, at least 24 hours before the conference, the names and honorifics of expected speakers and the telephone numbers from which they would join.
Notice of Appeal and Jurisdiction
The court addressed Whitfield’s February 3, 2025 notice of appeal. Ordinarily, filing a notice of appeal transfers control over the aspects of a case involved in the appeal to the court of appeals. The court explained that this rule does not apply to a plainly unauthorized appeal that can only be dismissed.
The court concluded that the December 23, 2024 opinion and order and the January 29, 2025 memorandum opinion and order were not final, appealable orders because several of Whitfield’s claims remained to be litigated. The court therefore ruled that the notice of appeal did not affect its jurisdiction, and the initial pretrial conference would proceed. The opinion does not state a disposition of any underlying claim.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.