Bronx Freedom Fund v. City of New York
- John Cronan
- 1:21-cv-10614
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bronx Freedom Fund v. City of New York, Judge Moses granted an application to adjourn the initial conference until after the motion to dismiss is decided.
The State Defendants, the City Defendants, the plaintiff, and William Kalish were affected by the postponement of the initial case-management conference. The parties must reschedule it after the motion to dismiss is decided.
What happened
In Bronx Freedom Fund v. City of New York, the State Defendants asked to postpone the initial case-management conference, which had been scheduled for May 9, 2022. The City Defendants joined that request, and counsel for the plaintiff and William Kalish consented.
The State Defendants argued that postponement would avoid potentially substantial discovery while their motion to dismiss was pending. They said the plaintiff sought records concerning thousands of people whose cash bail allegedly had been forfeited without a proper judicial order, and that beginning discovery before the motion was decided would burden and prejudice them.
Judge Barbara Moses granted the application to the extent that she adjourned the May 9 conference indefinitely. The parties must contact Judge Moses’s chambers within seven days after the court decides the motion to dismiss to reschedule the conference.
The detailed version
- Bronx Freedom Fund v. City of New York · No. 1:21-cv-10614
- John Cronan
- Apr. 18, 2022
Background
The State Defendants—Lawrence Marks, Deborah Kaplan, Alvin Yearwood, and Justin Barry—asked to postpone the initial case-management conference, then scheduled for May 9, 2022. The City Defendants joined the request. The plaintiff’s counsel and counsel for William Kalish consented.
Judge Cronan had allowed the State Defendants to file a motion to dismiss. Under the briefing schedule described in the application, the opening brief was due April 28, the opposition was due May 19, and the reply was due June 2.
Parties’ Request
The State Defendants requested either a stay of the conference until Judge Cronan decided the motion to dismiss or, alternatively, an adjournment to a date at least 30 days after June 2. They argued that the motion raised non-frivolous arguments, including that the plaintiff had adequate post-deprivation remedies that would bar relief under Section 1983. They also argued that discovery could be substantial because the plaintiff sought information about a proposed class of people whose cash bail had allegedly been taken by the New York City Department of Finance without a proper judicial order of forfeiture.
Ruling
Judge Barbara Moses granted the application to the extent that she adjourned the May 9 initial case-management conference indefinitely. The parties were ordered to contact Judge Moses’s chambers within seven days—one week—after the court decided the motion to dismiss so that the conference could be rescheduled. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss or the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.