Encarnacion v. Isabella Geriatric Center, Inc. et al

Filing 121

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 106 MOTION to Set Aside the Order entered by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV on September 11, 2014. filed by Eileen Casey, Mariam Paul, Edwin Santiago, Isabella Geriatric Center, Inc.. On Sep tember 11, 2014, Magistrate Judge Francis denied defendants' motion to strike plaintiff's jury demand. On September 24, 2014, defendants filed a motion to set aside that order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a). After reviewing the order in question, both parties' submissions, and applicable legal authority, the Court concludes that the decision is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Defendants' motion to set aside Judge Francis's September 11, 2014 order is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion pending at docket number 106. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 10/9/2014) (kgo)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------- X
:
LENNY ENCARNACION,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-against:
:
ISABELLA GERIATRIC CENTER, INC.,
:
ET AL.,
:
:
Defendants. :
----------------------------------------------------------------- X

USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #: _________________
DATE FILED: 10/9/2014

1:11-cv-3757-GHW
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER

GREGORY H. WOODS, District Judge:
On September 11, 2014, Magistrate Judge Francis denied defendants’ motion to strike
plaintiff’s jury demand. On September 24, 2014, defendants filed a motion to set aside that order
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a).
This Court may set aside a magistrate judge’s order in a non-dispositive matter only if it is
clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). A magistrate
judge's order is clearly erroneous where “‘on the entire evidence,’ the [district court] is ‘left with the
definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’” Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234,
235 (2001) (quoting United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948)). Under this
highly deferential standard of review, “magistrate judges are afforded broad discretion in resolving
non-dispositive disputes and reversal is appropriate only if their discretion is abused.” Flaherty v.
Filardi, 388 F. Supp. 2d 274, 283 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (internal alterations omitted).
After reviewing the order in question, both parties’ submissions, and applicable legal
authority, the Court concludes that the decision is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.

Defendants’ motion to set aside Judge Francis’s September 11, 2014 order is DENIED.
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion pending at docket number 106.

SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 9, 2014
New York, New York

_____________________________________
GREGORY H. WOODS
United States District Judge

2