Doe v. Helen Hayes Hospital
- Philip Halpern
- 7:20-cv-02331
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jane Doe v. Dr. Marjorie King, Judge Halpern denied Doe’s motions on the pleadings and defenses and granted counsel’s withdrawal motion.
Jane Doe, the defendants, and Maryam Jazini Dorcheh, Esq., whose withdrawal as plaintiff’s counsel was granted.
What happened
In Jane Doe v. Dr. Marjorie King, et al., the court held an initial pretrial conference and discussed the parties’ schedule for discovery and case management.
The court granted Maryam Jazini Dorcheh’s request to withdraw as plaintiff’s counsel. It treated the plaintiff’s pre-motion letter as motions asking for judgment based on the existing pleadings and to remove the defendants’ affirmative defenses, but denied both motions.
Judge Philip M. Halpern also directed the parties to file a discovery plan, prohibited further amendments to the pleadings, and referred the case to Magistrate Judge McCarthy for settlement discussions.
The detailed version
- Doe v. Helen Hayes Hospital · No. 7:20-cv-02331
- Philip Halpern
- Jan. 13, 2022
Proceeding
The court held an initial pretrial conference and a conference concerning anticipated motions. Counsel for Jane Doe, outgoing defense counsel, and incoming defense counsel participated by telephone.
Scheduling and Counsel
The court directed the parties to file a proposed civil-case discovery plan and scheduling order by January 14, 2022. The schedule set fact discovery to end by May 13, 2022, expert discovery to end by July 8, 2022, and a case-management conference for August 10, 2022, at 10:30 a.m. The parties were directed to remove the paragraph concerning amended pleadings because no further amendments would be permitted.
The court granted the motion filed by Maryam Jazini Dorcheh, Esq., to withdraw as counsel. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 77 and remove Dorcheh as counsel of record.
Motions
The court treated Doe’s pre-motion letter at docket entry 72 as two motions: a motion for judgment on the pleadings, which asks the court to decide based on the pleadings already filed, and a motion to strike the defendants’ affirmative defenses. The court considered the letter, the defendants’ response at docket entry 75, the arguments made at the hearing, and the cited case law. Judge Halpern denied both motions.
Settlement
The court discussed possible resolution of the case and stated that an order referring the matter to Magistrate Judge McCarthy for settlement would be docketed separately.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.