Griffin-Robinson v. Salov
- Freeman
- 1:20-cv-02712
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Griffin-Robinson v. Salov, Judge Freeman stayed Azor El’s case, denied reconsideration, and lifted most of Griffin-Robinson’s stay.
Jean Azor El’s civil case was stayed entirely while his criminal case was pending. Sonja R. Griffin-Robinson’s case could proceed, but depositions remained stayed. The City of New York and the defendants were subject to the court’s status-report and discovery-coordination instructions.
What happened
Griffin-Robinson v. Salov involved two related civil-rights cases brought by different people without lawyers. The cases arose at least partly from the same events and involved some of the same police-officer defendants. The court had temporarily paused discovery in Griffin-Robinson’s case while considering how to coordinate the cases.
The City of New York asked the court to pause all proceedings in Jean Azor El’s case because the facts overlapped with a pending criminal case against him. Azor El asked the court to reconsider the stay. The court also considered how the two cases’ discovery should proceed.
Judge Freeman granted the City’s request and stayed Azor El’s case entirely until his criminal case is resolved or the court orders otherwise. She denied Azor El’s motion to reconsider, lifted the temporary stay in Sonja R. Griffin-Robinson’s case except for depositions, and required the City to provide status updates every 30 days.
The detailed version
- Griffin-Robinson v. Salov · No. 1:20-cv-02712
- Freeman
- June 8, 2021
Background
The order addressed two related civil-rights lawsuits brought under Section 1983, a federal law that allows claims against state or local officials for certain constitutional violations. The first case was brought by Sonja R. Griffin-Robinson; the related case was brought by Jean Azor El. Both plaintiffs were proceeding without lawyers. The cases arose at least partly from the same events and named some of the same police officers as defendants.
The court had referred both cases to Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman for general pretrial supervision. In the Griffin-Robinson case, the court had temporarily stayed discovery to consider a coordinated discovery plan for both cases.
Motions and ruling
The City of New York moved to stay all proceedings in Azor El’s case while a criminal case against Azor El was pending. The City argued that the facts underlying the criminal case overlapped with those underlying Azor El’s civil lawsuit, that a grand jury had indicted him, and that the criminal case was ready for trial. Counsel for defendants Anthony Salov and Robert Forgione stated that those officers did not object to the requested stay. Azor El appeared to argue that the criminal case resulted from police misconduct.
Azor El separately moved for reconsideration of the stay in his case and, as the court understood his request, asked that no stay be imposed there.
The court ordered the following:
- The City’s motion to stay all proceedings in the related Azor El case, No. 20cv10857, was granted. That case was stayed in its entirety until the criminal case against Azor El was resolved or the court issued another order. - Azor El’s “Notice of Motion to Reconsider the Stay” was denied. - The temporary stay in the Griffin-Robinson case was lifted, except for depositions. Depositions remained stayed so they could possibly be coordinated between the two cases. - The City had to file a letter on the docket of each case every 30 days updating the court about the status of Azor El’s criminal case. The City also had to mail each status letter to Azor El and file proof of service in his case.
Classification
This was a procedural order concerning stays and coordination of pretrial proceedings. The court did not decide the underlying Section 1983 claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.