Urena v. The City of New York
- Jesse Furman
- 1:24-cv-01886
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Urena v. The City of New York, Judge Furman granted defendants’ application, adopted their briefing schedule, and stayed discovery pending motion practice.
Amaury Urena, who is proceeding without a lawyer, must follow the adopted briefing schedule, and discovery in his case is paused. The City of New York and Idi Guity may proceed with their planned motion challenging the complaint.
What happened
In Urena v. The City of New York, Amaury Urena, representing himself, alleges that he experienced unconstitutional confinement conditions at Rikers Island and in Bronx Supreme Criminal Court holding cells between March 17, 2021, and February 29, 2024. He brought the case under a federal civil-rights law.
The defendants asked to set deadlines for their planned motion challenging the complaint and to pause discovery. They argued that a release Urena signed in a prior related proceeding covered and barred the claims in this case. The court did not decide that argument in this order.
Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the application, adopted the defendants’ proposed briefing schedule, and stayed discovery until further order while the parties pursue motion practice. The Clerk was directed to terminate ECF No. 27 and mail a copy of the order to Urena.
The detailed version
- Urena v. The City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-01886
- Jesse Furman
- Apr. 8, 2025
Background
Amaury Urena is proceeding without a lawyer and brings claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of constitutional rights by state or local actors. He alleges that, on various dates from March 17, 2021, through February 29, 2024, he was subjected to unconstitutional conditions of confinement while incarcerated at Rikers Island and while being transported to holding cells at Bronx Supreme Criminal Court. He filed the original complaint on March 12, 2024, and an amended complaint on July 30, 2024.
The court had previously set a discovery schedule, with discovery due to close on July 23, 2025. The defendants—The City of New York and Idi Guity—asked the court to approve deadlines for their planned motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), a procedure for seeking judgment based on the pleadings. They also asked the court to pause discovery while that motion was pending.
Defendants’ stated basis
The defendants represented that Urena signed settlement paperwork on November 1, 2024, in a prior related proceeding. They asserted that the release covered the City of New York and the City’s past and present officials, employees, representatives, and agents, and released civil-rights and related state-law claims through the date of the release. Because the alleged events in this case occurred before November 1, 2024, the defendants argued that the release barred Urena’s claims.
The opinion does not decide whether the release bars the claims or otherwise resolve the anticipated motion. It addresses only the defendants’ application concerning the briefing schedule and discovery.
Ruling
Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the application. The court adopted the defendants’ proposed schedule: defendants’ motion papers were due May 8, 2025; Urena’s opposition, if any, was due June 9, 2025; and defendants’ reply was due June 23, 2025.
The court also stayed discovery pending motion practice, unless and until the court ordered otherwise, including on a motion by Urena. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 27 and mail a copy of the order to Urena.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.