Sheindlin v. Brady
- Lewis Liman
- 1:21-cv-01124
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Scheindlin v. Brady, Judge Liman set discovery deadlines, authorized a jury-trial motion, and barred Defendant Brady from disrespectful or personal attacks in court filings.
The order directly affected Defendant James Brady by setting deadlines for a possible jury-trial motion and restricting disrespectful or personal attacks in court appearances and submissions. It also set discovery and response deadlines affecting both parties.
What happened
In Gregory Scheindlin v. James Brady, the court set June 1, 2021, as the deadline to complete all discovery. The order also addressed Defendant Brady’s stated intention to seek a jury trial, despite Plaintiff’s representation that he was no longer seeking damages.
The court allowed Defendant Brady to file a motion for a jury trial by April 9, 2021. Plaintiff’s response was due April 16, and Defendant’s reply, if any, was due April 23.
Judge Lewis J. Liman also ordered Defendant Brady not to use disrespectful language or personal attacks against the court, judges, lawyers, or parties in court appearances or submissions. The order warned that violations could expose Defendant Brady to civil or criminal contempt.
The detailed version
- Sheindlin v. Brady · No. 1:21-cv-01124
- Lewis Liman
- Apr. 2, 2021
Background
The order followed a conference held on April 2, 2021. Plaintiff represented that he was no longer seeking damages. Defendant indicated an intention to file a motion for a jury trial. The order also stated that Defendant had used disrespectful language in correspondence with the court.
Court’s Orders
The court ordered that all discovery be completed by June 1, 2021.
The court permitted Defendant to file a motion for a jury trial by April 9, 2021, under the court’s individual practices, the district’s local rules, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff’s response was due April 16, 2021, and Defendant’s reply, if any, was due April 23, 2021.
The court further ordered Defendant not to use disrespectful language in any appearance before the court or in any submission to the court concerning the court, opposing counsel, or opposing parties. The order specifically prohibited language accusing a judge, opposing counsel, or an opposing party of being a criminal, corrupt, or a liar. It also prohibited personal attacks against any court member or judge, opposing counsel, or opposing party.
The order clarified that Defendant could still argue that a court decision was wrongly decided, that opposing counsel’s argument was incorrect, or that evidence was false or perjured. The court warned that using prohibited language could subject Defendant to civil or criminal contempt without further warning. The Clerk was directed to mail Defendant a copy of the order.
Disposition and Effect
This was a scheduling and courtroom-conduct order. It set discovery and briefing deadlines, addressed the procedure for Defendant’s proposed jury-trial motion, and imposed restrictions on Defendant’s language in court proceedings and submissions. It did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.