Nnebe v. Daus
- Richard Sullivan
- 1:06-cv-04991
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Nnebe v. Daus and Stallworth v. Joshi, Judge Sullivan expanded eligibility and scheduled the first compensatory-damages trial for twenty plaintiffs.
Class members seeking compensatory damages, the individual plaintiffs selected for the first damages trial, and the parties and counsel involved in preparing that trial.
What happened
In Nnebe v. Daus and Stallworth v. Joshi, the court considered the parties’ joint plan for handling individual plaintiffs’ claims for compensatory damages.
With the defendants’ consent, the court added class members who had told class counsel by January 27, 2023, that they wanted to seek compensatory damages. It also selected twenty plaintiffs for the first trial and set that trial for October 16 through October 24, 2023.
Judge Sullivan ordered the trial to take place in person before the court and a jury. The order also set deadlines for selected plaintiffs who could not participate, plaintiffs who wanted a trial without a jury, and the parties’ joint proposed pretrial order.
The detailed version
- Nnebe v. Daus · No. 1:06-cv-04991
- Richard Sullivan
- July 25, 2023
Background
The order contains captions for Nnebe v. Daus, No. 06-cv-4991 (RJS), and Stallworth v. Joshi, No. 17-cv-7119 (RJS). The court received the parties’ January 28, 2023 joint litigation plan and later letters dated May 3 and June 23, 2023, updating and clarifying that plan. The order concerns individual plaintiffs who may seek compensatory damages.
Order
With the defendants’ consent, the court extended the group of individual plaintiffs eligible for a compensatory-damages trial to include class members who informed class counsel by January 27, 2023, that they wanted to seek compensatory damages.
The court ordered that the first damages trial for twenty plaintiffs take place in person from October 16 through October 24, 2023, before the court and a jury. The trial was to address whether each plaintiff would have received a constitutionally adequate hearing after suspension if that hearing had been available and known to the plaintiff at the time; whether the plaintiff’s license would have been reinstated after such a hearing; and, if so, what damages resulted from not receiving the hearing. The opinion cites Warren v. Pataki, 823 F.3d 125, 143 (2d Cir. 2016), for these issues.
The twenty randomly selected plaintiffs were Olson Weekes, Willy J. Rodriguez, Ismoil Umarov, Carlos A Gonzabay, Nur I. Miah, Chingis Dashitsyrenov, Ayman I. Hamad, Ning Zhang, Junior Heredia Andrade, Kwasi Manu, Daniel A. Lasso, Rafael Manashirov, Raylel Y. Lorenzo-Grullon, Kevin Omalley, Khadim Diop, Abdoul Diane, Lenny A. Polanco, Dilawer Khan, Souleymane Diaby, and Kamara-Jai Njenga Warren.
Deadlines and disposition
The selected plaintiffs were required to file detailed affidavits by August 14, 2023, if they could not participate in the first trial. Plaintiffs who wanted to give up a jury trial and proceed before the judge alone also had to notify the court by August 14, 2023. The parties had to submit a joint proposed pretrial order by September 15, 2023. Richard J. Sullivan, a United States Circuit Judge sitting by designation, entered the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.