Brock v. CVS Corporation
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-04014
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Brock v. CVS Corporation, Judge Briccetti extended defense counsel’s filing deadline and denied fee-free appeal status.
Brock, the defendants, and defense counsel were affected by the extended filing deadline and the upcoming initial conference; anyone seeking to appeal the order would be affected by the denial of fee-free appeal status.
What happened
In Brock v. CVS Corporation, the court had required the parties to file a proposed discovery and scheduling plan by June 7, 2023, before an initial conference set for June 14, 2023. The parties had not filed the plan by the deadline.
The court extended defense counsel’s deadline to file the plan until June 12, 2023, at noon. It also directed that a copy of the order and conference notice be mailed to Brock.
The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status for that appeal. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti issued the order; it did not decide the parties’ underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Brock v. CVS Corporation · No. 7:22-cv-04014
- Vincent Briccetti
- June 8, 2023
Background The court had issued a notice scheduling an initial case-management conference for June 14, 2023, at 9:30 a.m. The notice directed the parties to complete and file a proposed Civil Case Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order by June 7, 2023. The order states that the parties had not done so.
Court’s action The court extended the deadline for defense counsel to file the proposed discovery plan and scheduling order until June 12, 2023, at 12:00 p.m. The order also states that chambers would mail Brock a copy of the order and the notice of initial conference.
Appeal-related ruling The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. Based on that certification, it denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. This order addressed scheduling and appeal-related status; it did not resolve the underlying claims or defenses. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti signed the order.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.