Taylor v. Trigeno
- Gregory Woods
- 1:16-cv-01143
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Taylor v. Trigeno, Judge Woods partly lifted and partly extended the stay, allowing some claims to proceed while pausing others.
Roy Taylor, the defendants, and the claims in the case: claims concerning the alleged January 26, 2016 incident involving Correction Officer Quayyum could proceed, while the other claims remained stayed.
What happened
In Taylor v. Trigeno, the court considered the defendants’ request to extend the case’s stay and Taylor’s request to lift it. The court lifted the stay for Taylor’s claims concerning the alleged January 26, 2016 incident involving Correction Officer Quayyum.
The court extended the stay for all other claims because they concerned Taylor’s arrest or ongoing criminal proceedings. It also set a deadline for Quayyum’s proposed motion to dismiss, planned an initial pretrial conference, requested briefing on Taylor’s motions to amend the complaint, and said it would follow up about Taylor’s reported lack of law-library access.
Judge Gregory H. Woods ordered that the stay-related motions be granted in part and denied in part, directed the clerk to modify the stay accordingly, and terminated the motions listed at docket numbers 119, 122, and 131.
The detailed version
- Taylor v. Trigeno · No. 1:16-cv-01143
- Gregory Woods
- Dec. 10, 2020
Background
The case involves claims by Roy Taylor against NYPD Officer Alyssa Trigeno, NYPD Sgt. Michael Dunlavey, Rikers C.O. Quayyum, and the City of New York. The court had stayed the case. On November 5, 2020, it held a conference about the defendants’ motion to extend the stay and Taylor’s motion to lift it.
Ruling on the stay
For the reasons stated at the conference, the court granted in part and denied in part both motions. It lifted the stay for Taylor’s claims concerning the alleged January 26, 2016 incident involving Correction Officer Quayyum. It extended the stay for all other claims because they related to Taylor’s arrest or ongoing criminal proceedings. The clerk was directed to lift the stay only to that extent.
Other case-management matters
The court said it would schedule an initial pretrial conference by separate order. Quayyum had requested permission to file a motion to dismiss, and the court set December 30, 2020, as the deadline for filing it. Taylor’s opposition was due February 1, 2021, and Quayyum’s reply, if any, was due February 15, 2020, as stated in the order.
Taylor also submitted a letter reporting that he had allegedly been denied access to the law library. The defendants agreed to investigate the issue, and the court said it would follow up at the initial pretrial conference. Because part of the stay was lifted, the court requested briefing on Taylor’s pending motions for permission to amend his complaint. Defendants’ opposition was due December 30, 2020, and Taylor’s reply, if any, was due February 1, 2021.
Disposition
Judge Gregory H. Woods ordered the clerk to terminate the motions at docket numbers 119, 122, and 131. This order addressed the stay and other case-management issues; the provided text does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.