Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 28, 2023

United States v. All That Lot Or Parcel of Land Located At 19 Duck Pond Lane

Full caption

United States v. All That Lot Or Parcel of Land Located At 19 Duck Pond Lane, Southampton, New York 11968, Together With Its Buildings, Appurtenances, Improvements, Fixtures, Attachments, and Easements

Judge
Clarke
Docket
1:23-cv-01545
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In United States v. 19 Duck Pond Lane, Judge Clarke reassigned the case and ordered a joint status letter without deciding the dispute.

Who this affects

The United States, the property and other named defendants, and their counsel are affected by the reassignment, the requirement to file a joint status letter, and the continuing deadlines and procedures.

What happened

United States v. All That Lot Or Parcel of Land Located At 19 Duck Pond Lane, Southampton, New York 11968, Together With Its Buildings, Appurtenances, Improvements, Fixtures, Attachments, and Easements concerns a property named as a defendant in the United States’ case.

The court announced that the case had been reassigned and said that all earlier orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect unless changed. It ordered the parties to file a joint letter by August 11, 2023, describing the case’s status, including the parties’ positions, jurisdiction and venue, service by publication, deadlines, motions, discovery, settlement discussions, possible mediation, and the estimated trial length.

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke issued a case-management order and did not decide the underlying dispute, any motion, or any claim.

The detailed version

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

Case
United States v. All That Lot Or Parcel of Land Located At 19 Duck Pond Lane · No. 1:23-cv-01545
Judge
Clarke
Date
July 28, 2023

What the order does

The court issued a notice that the case had been reassigned to Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. It stated that, unless the court later ordered otherwise, all prior orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect despite the reassignment. The order also directed all counsel to review the judge’s individual rules and practices.

Required joint status letter

The parties were ordered to file a joint letter on the court’s electronic filing system no later than August 11, 2023. The letter could not exceed five pages, except that certain lengthy jurisdictional information could be placed in an appendix outside the page limit.

The letter had to address:

- the names and current contact information of counsel; - the nature of the case, principal defenses, and major legal and factual issues; - why federal jurisdiction and venue are proper; - the status of the government’s service by publication; - existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - previously scheduled conferences that had not occurred; - outstanding motions and the relief they seek; - pending appeals; - discovery completed and discovery still needed for meaningful settlement discussions; - the status of prior settlement discussions without stating exact offers or demands; - whether the parties had discussed mediation or other alternative dispute-resolution procedures; - the estimated length of trial; and - any other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.

If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties did not have to file the letter or appear, provided that proof of termination was filed before the deadline. The order also described the procedures and timing for requesting extensions or adjournments.

Disposition and significance

This is a case-management and reassignment order. It does not rule on the merits, dismiss any claim, grant or deny a motion, or enter judgment. Judge Clarke ordered the joint status update and left prior orders, dates, and deadlines in place unless further changed by the court.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.