Chavez v. Finney
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-04109
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Chavez v. Finney, Judge Abrams ordered defendants to brief whether a disorderly-conduct summons led to proceedings and a favorable outcome.
Juan Pablo Chavez and defendants Sergeant William Finney, Officer Stephen Streicher, and Officer Anthony Tortorice; the order specifically imposes a briefing and evidence requirement on the defendants.
What happened
In Chavez v. Finney, defendants had a pending request for summary judgment, which asks the court to decide a case without a trial when there is no genuine dispute about important facts.
The court directed defendants to explain whether a disorderly-conduct summons issued to Juan Pablo Chavez on April 20, 2019, led to formal proceedings. If proceedings occurred, defendants must provide their date, outcome, and evidence addressing whether they ended in Chavez’s favor.
Judge Ronnie Abrams did not decide the summary-judgment motion in this order. She ordered defendants to submit a letter brief by March 25, 2022, supported by testimonial or documentary evidence for their factual statements.
The detailed version
- Chavez v. Finney · No. 1:19-cv-04109
- Ronnie Abrams
- Mar. 21, 2022
Purpose of the Order
The court issued this order to assist its review of the defendants’ pending motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment is a procedure for resolving a case without trial when the governing legal standards and undisputed facts permit that result.
Required Submission
The defendants—Sergeant William Finney, Officer Stephen Streicher, and Officer Anthony Tortorice—were ordered to submit a letter brief by March 25, 2022. The letter must address whether a disorderly-conduct summons issued to plaintiff Juan Pablo Chavez on April 20, 2019, led to any formal proceedings.
If formal proceedings occurred, the defendants must state when they occurred, describe their outcome, and address whether they “terminated in [Chavez’s] favor.” The defendants must support factual assertions with testimonial or documentary evidence.
What the Court Decided
The order does not state the court’s decision on the pending summary-judgment motion and does not resolve the parties’ underlying claims. It directs the defendants to provide additional information and supporting evidence.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.