Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 19, 2023

Noe v. Ray Realty

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:19-cv-01455
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
21
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Noe v. Ray Realty, Judge Rearden reassigned the case, kept prior deadlines, adjourned district-judge appearances, and ordered a status letter.

Who this affects

Carol Noe, the defendants, their counsel, and the court are affected. The parties must follow the reassignment instructions, and the defendants must file and serve the required joint status letter.

What happened

In Noe v. Ray Realty, the case was reassigned to District Judge Jennifer H. Rearden. The order did not decide the parties’ claims or defenses.

Judge Rearden kept all earlier orders, dates, and deadlines in effect. Previously scheduled appearances before the district judge were adjourned, while proceedings before the magistrate judge would continue as scheduled. The parties were ordered to prepare a joint update, and the defendants were ordered to file and serve it within three weeks.

The update must describe the case’s claims and defenses, jurisdiction, deadlines, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, possible mediation, and expected trial length. Judge Rearden also directed the Clerk to mail the order and her rules to pro se Plaintiff Carol Noe.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Noe v. Ray Realty · No. 1:19-cv-01455
Judge
Rearden
Date
Jan. 19, 2023

What the order does

This is a notice of reassignment and case-management order. The case was reassigned to Judge Jennifer H. Rearden. The order does not resolve any claim, defense, motion, or jurisdictional issue.

Effect of the reassignment

Unless the court later orders otherwise, all prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect. Any conference or oral argument before, or directed by, the magistrate judge will proceed as previously ordered. Previously scheduled appearances or conferences before the district judge are adjourned until the court provides further notice.

Required joint status letter

Within three weeks after the order was filed, the parties must confer and prepare a joint letter. The defendants must file the letter electronically and serve it on pro se Plaintiff Carol Noe. The letter may not exceed five double-spaced pages.

To the extent relevant, the letter must separately address:

- Counsel’s names and current contact information; - The nature of the claims and principal defenses; - Why federal jurisdiction and venue are proper, including required citizenship information for entities in diversity cases; - Existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - Previously scheduled but unfinished conferences or arguments; - Outstanding motions, including their filing dates and requested relief; - Pending appeals; - Discovery completed and any essential remaining discovery; - The status of settlement discussions without exact offers or demands; - Whether alternative dispute resolution has been discussed and whether a settlement conference, district mediation, or private mediator could be productive; - The estimated length of trial; and - Any other information that could help the court move the case forward, including dispositive or novel issues.

If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties did not need to submit the joint letter or appear, provided that appropriate proof of termination was filed before the deadline.

Pro se procedures

The order states that pro se parties must follow Judge Rearden’s rules for civil cases involving parties without lawyers. Those rules address communications with the court, filing papers, service, discovery disputes, motions, conferences, pretrial submissions, and other case procedures. The Clerk was directed to mail the order and the judge’s rules to Carol Noe.

Disposition

Judge Rearden ordered the reassignment-related procedures and the joint status update described above. The opinion contains no merits ruling and does not state that the case was dismissed, entered judgment, or otherwise terminated.

The authoritative version

Read the full 21-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.