Nachshen v. 53-55 West 21ST Owner LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-01903
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Nachshen v. 53-55 West 21st Owner LLC, Judge Abrams ordered a 90-day estate update while the parties asked to postpone their settlement conference.
The plaintiff’s estate and counsel, along with defendants 53-55 West 21st Owner LLC and New Lounge 4323, LLC, were affected by the order concerning estate representation and the postponed settlement conference.
What happened
In Nachshen v. 53-55 West 21st Owner LLC, the parties jointly asked to postpone a settlement conference while a representative for the plaintiff’s estate was being appointed. The filing followed a notice reporting the plaintiff’s death and requesting a stay.
The defendants said they might later ask to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims. They argued that the federal disability claim could no longer continue and that the court might decline to keep the remaining state-law claims. No dismissal motion was decided in this filing.
Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered the plaintiff’s counsel to update the court within 90 days about appointing an executor for the estate. The filing also records the parties’ request to postpone the settlement conference.
The detailed version
- Nachshen v. 53-55 West 21ST Owner LLC · No. 1:19-cv-01903
- Ronnie Abrams
- Feb. 18, 2021
Background
The filing concerns a joint request by the parties to postpone a settlement conference that had been scheduled for February 22, 2021. The request followed plaintiff’s counsel’s filing of a notice reporting the plaintiff’s death and seeking a stay while a representative for the estate was appointed.
The complaint alleged violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, the New York Civil Rights Law, and New York common-law negligence.
Parties’ Positions
The parties jointly asked that the settlement conference be postponed indefinitely until a representative for the plaintiff’s estate could be appointed. The defendants stated that, if counsel located an estate representative and notified the court that the litigation would continue, they would evaluate whether to seek dismissal of the complaint.
The defendants argued that the federal disability claims seeking an injunction were moot because, under their cited authorities, those claims did not survive the plaintiff’s death. They also stated that, if no federal claims remained, they would evaluate asking the court to decline to continue exercising authority over the state-law claims.
Court’s Action
The court ordered counsel for the plaintiff to advise the court within 90 days about the status of appointing an executor for the estate. The text also records the parties’ joint request to postpone the settlement conference. It does not show that the court granted or denied a motion to dismiss any claim.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addressed estate-representation and settlement-conference matters rather than deciding the parties’ underlying disability, state-law, or negligence claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.