165 Housing Corporation v. Glencar Insurance Company
- Ho
- 1:23-cv-07873
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In 165 Housing Corporation v. Glencar Insurance Company, Judge Ho reassigned the case and set case-management requirements and a later conference.
165 Housing Corporation, Glencar Insurance Company, and their counsel were affected by the reassignment, the rescheduled conference, and the filing and case-management requirements.
What happened
165 Housing Corporation v. Glencar Insurance Company concerns a case reassigned to Judge Dale E. Ho. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or defenses.
The court kept all prior orders, dates, and deadlines in effect but moved the conference from November 7 to November 14, 2023. It required the parties to confer about settlement and file a joint letter and proposed case-management plan by November 9, 2023.
Judge Ho did not decide the merits or resolve any claims. The order instead provides instructions for managing the case and preparing for the conference.
The detailed version
- 165 Housing Corporation v. Glencar Insurance Company · No. 1:23-cv-07873
- Ho
- Oct. 20, 2023
Nature of the Order
This is a notice of reassignment and case-management order. The opinion does not identify the claims, defenses, or underlying dispute between 165 Housing Corporation and Glencar Insurance Company.
Court’s Directions
Judge Dale E. Ho stated that the case had been reassigned to him. He directed counsel to follow the court’s individual practices and stated that all earlier orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect unless the court later ordered otherwise.
The court adjourned the conference scheduled for November 7, 2023, to November 14, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The conference was to be held through Microsoft Teams. The parties were ordered to confer before the conference about settlement and the subjects required for a case-management conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16.
The court also ordered the parties to file a joint letter and a proposed civil case-management plan and scheduling order by November 9, 2023. The letter had to address the nature of the action and principal defenses, jurisdiction and venue, existing deadlines, outstanding motions, completed and needed discovery, prior settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute-resolution methods, and other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.
Other Instructions and Effect
If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, counsel did not need to file the joint letter or appear, as long as proof of termination was filed before the conference. Requests to extend a deadline or adjourn the conference had to be made by letter-motion filed at least two business days beforehand and had to include the information specified by the court.
The order did not decide the merits, dismiss the case, enter judgment, or rule on a claim or motion. It set procedural requirements for the next stage of the case.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.