Lurch, Jr. v. The City of New York
- Ona Wang
- 1:23-cv-05249
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lurch, Jr. v. City of New York, Judge Wang deemed two premature summary-judgment motions withdrawn and denied defendants’ motion to strike as moot.
Robert Derek Lurch, Jr. and the defendants, including The City of New York; the order controls when Plaintiff may file another summary-judgment motion and restricts access to a filing containing his confidential medical records.
What happened
In Robert Derek Lurch, Jr. v. The City of New York, et al., the self-represented plaintiff filed two motions asking for judgment while the parties were still conducting discovery.
The defendants asked the court to strike both motions as premature. The court found that summary judgment should generally be considered after discovery ends, and noted that the plaintiff said he would seek summary judgment after discovery.
Judge Wang ordered that the two motions be deemed withdrawn and denied the defendants’ motion to strike as moot. She also barred further summary-judgment motions until the court sets a briefing schedule after discovery, and directed the clerk to restrict access to a filing containing confidential medical records.
The detailed version
- Lurch, Jr. v. The City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-05249
- Ona Wang
- Apr. 18, 2024
Background
The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang for general pretrial matters and dispositive motions. The parties had participated in an unsuccessful mediation and were conducting discovery. Plaintiff Robert Derek Lurch, Jr., who was representing himself, filed a motion for summary judgment on March 7, 2024, and a second motion dated March 29, 2024. Defendants filed a letter asking the court to strike both motions as premature.
Reasoning
The court explained that summary judgment is properly filed after discovery has closed. Because discovery was ongoing, the court determined that Plaintiff’s two motions were premature. The court also noted that Plaintiff appeared to agree, because he wrote that he would move for summary judgment at the close of discovery.
Ruling
The court ordered that Plaintiff’s two motions for summary judgment should be deemed withdrawn. It denied Defendants’ motion to strike as moot. The court directed Plaintiff not to file another summary-judgment motion until the court enters a briefing schedule following the close of discovery. It also directed Defendants to serve the order on Plaintiff and file proof of service. The clerk was directed to close the docket entry for Defendants’ motion to strike and to restrict access to Plaintiff’s filing containing confidential medical records so that it would be viewable only by the court and the parties.
The order did not decide the merits of Plaintiff’s claims or determine whether either side was entitled to summary judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.