Schoolcraft v. The City Of New York et al

Filing 44

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Donna Canfield dated 10/29/10 re: Request to extend time to 12/2/10 for City defendants to answer the Amended Complaint. ENDORSEMENT: So Ordered. The City Of New York answer due 12/2/2010; New York City Police Department answer due 12/2/2010. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 11/1/10) (cd)

JUDGE S\\IEET C~
THE CITY OF NEW YORK

LAW DEPARTMENT

)WCHAEL A. C;\.RDOZO

100 CffiJRCH STREET
NEW YORK" NY 10007

Corporartoll Couns~'

DoNNA A. CANFIELD

Assisrcslll COl']XJration Counsel
phone: [phone]
fax: (2\2)788-8877'
mobile: [phone]
email: [e-mail]

BY FACSIMILE: 212-805-7925
Honorable Robert W. Sweet
United States District Judge
Southern District ofNew York
500 Pearl Street
New York. New York 10007
Re:

Schoolcraft v. The City of New York, et a1.
Civil Action Number: 10 CV 6005
LM #: 2010-033074

Dear Judge Sweet:

I am the Assistant Corporation Counse) in the office of Michael A. Cardozo,
Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, assigned to represent the City of New York and
the New York City Police Department ("NYPD") (coJle~tively the "City defendants") in the
above-referenced matter. I write, with the consent of plaintiff's counsel, to request an additional
thirty (30) day extension of time to answer or othenvise respond to plaintifPs Amended
Complaint, from November 2, 2010 to December 2. 2010. This is City defendants' second
request for an enlargement of time to respond to the Amended Complaint.
Plaintiff, a former police officer with the NYPD, brings this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for violations of his First, Fourth, and Fourteenth
Amendment rights, and under New York State tort law against the City defendants, ten (10)
individually-named members of the NYPD, and fifty (50) individual members of the NYPD
identified only as "John Doe." Although City defendants are actively investigating plaintiff's
claims alleged in the Amended Complaint. it has been determined that an additional thirty (30)
days are necessary to complete our investigation/interviews of all members of the NYPD named
in the Amended Complaint, determine the scope of representation, and prepare an appropriate
.:s::»
~
response to the Amended Complaint.

S

R

7//;>f)j

VOO/lOOd wdEO=PO

O~Ol

6l

t~O

LL8888LUl

x~.:J

For these reasons. City defendants respectfully request a further extension of time
to answer or otherwise respond to plaintiffs Complaint until December 2,2010,
I thank the Court for its consideration ofthis reqnest.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/

Donna A. Canfield
Assistant Corporation Counsel
[e-mail]
cc:

Jon L. Nonnsberg
Auorney for Plaintiff
225 Broadway, Suite 2700

New York, New York 10007

(by email: Norinsberg@.aol.com)

Cohen & Fitch, LLP

Gerald Cohen

Joshua Fitch

Attorneys for Plaintiff
225 Broadway, Suite 2700

New York, New York 10007
(by email: gcohen(a{cihenfitch.com;[e-mail])
Gregory John Radollusli

Martin Clearwater & Bell LLP (NYC)

Attorneys for Jamaica Hospital

220 East 42nd Street

13th Floor

New York, NY 10017

(by email: [e-mail])

Brian E Lee

Law Office of J. David O'Brien

Attorneys for Dr. lsak Isakov

20 Vesey Street

Suite 1210

New York, NY 10007

(by email: [e-mail]) .

Bruce Morgan Brady

Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP

ATtorneysfor Dt. Lillian Aldana-Bernier
150 East 42nd Street
-2­

VOO/EOOd wdEO:VO

O~Ol

Bl

l~O

U8888LUl

XBj

New York, NY 10017

(by email: [e-mail])

-3-

VOO/VOOd Wd£O:VO

O~Ol

6l

+~o

LL8BB8LUl xej