Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 23, 2021

Knopf v. Esposito

Judge
Sarah Netburn
Docket
1:17-cv-05833
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Knopf v. Esposito, Judge Cote ordered a telephone conference about attorney Eric Berry’s communications with witness Michael Sanford and possible sanctions.

Who this affects

The order directly concerned non-party witness Michael Sanford and the plaintiffs’ attorney, Eric Berry, and required the parties to participate in the telephone conference.

What happened

Knopf v. Esposito concerns requests by non-party witness Michael Sanford to discuss the conduct of the plaintiffs’ attorney, Eric Berry, and whether Berry should be sanctioned.

The court ordered a telephone conference for February 25, 2021, to consider whether Berry should be barred from further oral communication with Sanford and to set a schedule for any motion seeking sanctions. The order did not decide whether Berry should be barred or sanctioned.

Judge Denise Cote issued the order on February 23, 2021. The conference was to be held by telephone because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Knopf v. Esposito · No. 1:17-cv-05833
Judge
Sarah Netburn
Date
Feb. 23, 2021

Background

Through letters dated February 19 and February 23, 2021, non-party witness Michael Sanford asked for a conference concerning the conduct of the plaintiffs’ attorney, Eric Berry, and whether Berry should be sanctioned. The order cites a prior related proceeding concerning the case.

Order

The court ordered a conference for Thursday, February 25, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. The conference was to address whether the court should issue an order forbidding Berry from having any further oral communication with Sanford and to establish a schedule for any motion to sanction Berry.

Because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the conference was ordered to take place by telephone. The order provided dial-in information and instructed the parties to use a landline if available. The opinion does not state that the court actually barred Berry from communicating with Sanford or imposed sanctions.

Disposition

The court ordered the conference; it did not decide the requested communication restriction or any sanctions motion in this order. Judge Denise Cote signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.