Mata v. Avianca, Inc.
- P. Castel
- 1:22-cv-01461
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mata v. Avianca, Inc., Judge Castel ordered counsel to submit copies of cited cases and warned that failure would result in dismissal.
Plaintiff Roberto Mata and his counsel, Peter LoDuca, were required to provide copies of the cited cases. The order stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the action.
What happened
In Mata v. Avianca, Inc., the court ordered Peter LoDuca, counsel for plaintiff Roberto Mata, to file an affidavit with copies of cases cited in a submission to the court.
The order identified eight cases, including decisions involving airlines and air-crash litigation. It stated that the affidavit was due by April 18, 2022, although the order itself is dated April 11, 2023.
Judge Castel ordered compliance and stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the action under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The detailed version
- Mata v. Avianca, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-01461
- P. Castel
- Apr. 11, 2023
Order
The court ordered Peter LoDuca, the counsel of record for plaintiff Roberto Mata, to file an affidavit annexing copies of cases cited in counsel’s submission. The order listed eight cases, numbered 1 through 7 and 9, including Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co., Ltd.; Shaboon v. Egyptair; Peterson v. Iran Air; Martinez v. Delta Airlines, Inc.; Estate of Durden v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines; Ehrlich v. American Airlines, Inc.; Miller v. United Airlines, Inc.; and In re Air Crash Disaster Near New Orleans, LA.
Deadline and Consequence
The order stated that the affidavit was due by April 18, 2022. It further stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the action under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a rule concerning dismissal for failure to prosecute or comply with a court order.
Disposition
The court issued the document as an order requiring the filing. It did not state that the action was dismissed in this order. The opinion is dated April 11, 2023, but gives a filing deadline of April 18, 2022; the text does not explain that apparent date discrepancy.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.