Lopez v. New York City Department of Education
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:17-cv-09205
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Lopez v. New York City Department of Education: Judge Abrams granted defendants’ request for more time to propose redactions to court filings.
The defendants, including the New York City Department of Education, received additional time to submit proposed redactions and explanations concerning their Rule 72 objections. The opinion states that Jennifer Ade and Nitza Bellamy had previously been dismissed from the case.
What happened
In Perry Lopez v. New York City Department of Education, the defendants asked to keep their objections to a magistrate judge’s sanctions order completely sealed. The court refused that request but allowed them to suggest specific redactions instead.
The defendants then asked for until June 9, 2023, to submit the proposed redactions and explanations. Their attorney said she would be out of the country from May 26 through June 1.
Judge Ronnie Abrams granted the application. The order extended the deadline for submitting proposed redactions; it did not decide whether any particular redaction would be approved.
The detailed version
- Lopez v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:17-cv-09205
- Ronnie Abrams
- May 26, 2023
Background
The parties attended a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Moses on April 27, 2023. On May 4, Judge Moses issued an order sanctioning the New York City Law Department and the New York City Department of Education in connection with their participation in that conference.
The defendants filed objections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72. They also asked to file the objections entirely under seal, meaning they sought to keep them from public access. On May 24, Judge Abrams denied that request but allowed the defendants to propose redactions and explain why each redaction was needed. The court did not set a deadline for those submissions.
Application and ruling
The defendants requested permission to submit their proposed redactions by June 9, 2023. Their attorney stated that she had a pre-planned vacation and would be outside the country from May 26 through June 1, returning to the office on June 2.
Judge Ronnie Abrams wrote, “Application granted,” and ordered the request granted. The order extended the time to submit proposed redactions and supporting explanations. It did not rule on whether the proposed redactions themselves would be allowed.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.