Reyes Nepomuceno v. Columbia Deli & Grill Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:19-cv-03150-MKV-RWL
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Reyes Nepomuceno v. Columbia Deli, Judge Vyskocil gave pro se defendant Algaad a final chance to oppose partial summary judgment.
Mr. Algaad, who was proceeding without a lawyer, received a final deadline to oppose Eduardo Reyes Nepomuceno’s pending motion for partial summary judgment. The plaintiff’s reply deadline was also set.
What happened
In Reyes Nepomuceno v. Columbia Deli & Grill Inc., defense counsel had withdrawn from representing Mr. Algaad, who was then proceeding without a lawyer. He had not filed an opposition to the plaintiff’s pending motion for partial summary judgment.
The court gave Mr. Algaad one final opportunity to respond by August 12, 2022. It warned that his response must identify specific facts showing a real factual dispute for trial. Any reply from the plaintiff was due August 19, 2022.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil did not decide the summary-judgment motion in this order. She stated that if Mr. Algaad missed the deadline, the court would consider the motion unopposed and accept the plaintiff’s supporting factual statements as undisputed.
The detailed version
- Reyes Nepomuceno v. Columbia Deli & Grill Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-03150-MKV-RWL
- Vyskocil
- July 21, 2022
Background
In an earlier order, the court granted defense counsel’s request to withdraw from representing Defendant Mr. Algaad, directed the Clerk of Court to identify him as proceeding without a lawyer, and ordered him to file any opposition to Plaintiff Eduardo Reyes Nepomuceno’s pending motion for partial summary judgment by November 1, 2021. The order states that Mr. Algaad had not filed an opposition as of July 21, 2022.
Order
Because Mr. Algaad was proceeding without a lawyer, the court granted him one final opportunity to oppose the motion. It ordered him to file any opposition by August 12, 2022. The court explained that he must respond by affidavit or by another method allowed under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and must provide specific facts showing a genuine dispute over a material fact for trial.
The court warned that if Mr. Algaad did not meet the August 12 deadline, it would consider Plaintiff’s motion unopposed and accept as undisputed the factual statements in the affidavits or other documents submitted in support of the motion. Any reply supporting the motion was due August 19, 2022. The Clerk was asked to mail Mr. Algaad a copy of the order.
Disposition and significance
This was an interim procedural order setting deadlines and warning of the consequences of failing to respond. It did not grant or deny the motion for partial summary judgment. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also encouraged Mr. Algaad to consent to receive filings electronically.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.