OSHINSKY v. NEW YORK FOOTBALL GIANTS, INC. et al

Filing 29

LETTER ORDER filed. Signed by Judge Peter G. Sheridan on 6/3/09. (cs, )

Case 2:09-cv-01 186-PGS-ES

Document 27

Filed 05/29/2009

Page 1 of 2

McCARTER &ENGLISH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

VIA ECF AND FIRST CLASS MAIL May 29, 2009 Hon. Peter G. Sheridan United States District Court for the District of New Jersey Clarkson S. Fisher Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse 402 East State Street Trenton, New Jersey 08608
Witiam J. OShaughriessy
Partner

[e-mail]

Re: Oshinsky v. New York Football Giants, Inc., Giants Stadium LLC, New York Jets LLC, Jets Stadium Development LLC, and New Meadowlands Stadium Company, LLC Civil Action No. 09-1186 (PGS) (ES) Dear Judge Sheridan:

McCarter & Engiish, LLP

Four Gateway Center
100 Mulberry Street 02 4 tJ7 F. 9 7 3 . 6 2 4 . 7 0 7 0

www.mccarter.com

We are counsel for defendants New York Football Giants, Inc. and Giants Stadium Development LLC ("Giants Defendants"). We write together with Proskauer Rose LLP, counsel for New York Jets LLC and Jets Stadium Development LLC ("Jets Defendants"). By this action, Plaintiff challenges each team's respective sale of Personal Seat Licenses ("PSLs") in connection with season tickets for games at their new stadium expected to open for 2010-11 season. In accordance with stipulated dates, both the Giants and Jets Defendants intend to file motions to dismiss the Complaint on June 5, 2009. See Stipulation and Order filed 5/5/09, Docket No. 24. Because the claims and underlying allegations against all Defendants substantially overlap, we respecifully propose, in the interests of efficiency and judicial economy, to crossreference points set forth in each other's briefs and thereby avoid duplication wherever feasible for the benefit of the Court and all parties. By proceeding that way, we believe each of the two briefs will be no more than 25 pages. Of course, if the Court would prefer Defendants to proceed otherwise, we will make our submissions however directed. As a further clarification for the Court, we also note that, by the referenced Stipulation, the case is stayed against defendant New Meadowlands Stadium Company, LLC ("NMSCo") pending determination of the motions to dismiss. The same claims that will be subject to the motions are asserted against NMSCo, which we advised Plaintiff's counsel had no substantive role with respect to the marketing

BO S T O N

H A RT F O RD

NEW YORK

NEWARK

PHILADELPHIA

STAMFORD

WILM NGTON

MEl 8630646v.1

ease 2:09cv-01 1 86-PGS-ES

Document 27

Filed 05/29/2009

Page 2 of 2

Hon. Peter G. Sheridan May 29, 2009 Page 2

or sale of PSLs. Because dismissal of daims against the other defendants would, by extension, apply to NMSC0, NMSCo will not be filing a separate motion to dismiss, though we can arrange for one to be filed if your Honor would prefer that. Respectfully,

4)Q
cc:

William J. O'Shaughnessy All counsel (via ECF)

2·

MEl 8630646v1