Wood et al v. Mutual Redevelopment Houses, Inc. et al

Filing 309

ORDER. Plaintiffs' request for an extension of time to oppose Defendants' motion for summary judgment on this basis is DENIED. After a party submits an affidavit or declaration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d), the Court wi ll then determine whether to (1) deny or defer consideration of the motion for summary judgment, (2) allow time to obtain affidavits, declarations, or take further discovery, or (3) issue any other appropriate order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d)(1)(3). Plai ntiffs' request to receive guidance regarding how the Court will rule prior to submitting such an affidavit or declaration, therefore, is DENIED. Plaintiffs shall file digital media by mailing it to the Court's chambers at the Daniel Patric k Moynihan United States Courthouse, Courtroom 15D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007, and shall serve it promptly by mail on Defendants. Plaintiffs request to redact their filings is GRANTED because the proposed redactions would prevent public di sclosure of confidential financial information, personally identifiable information, and medical information. Plaintiffs shall e-mail unredacted copies of the documents to [e-mail]. Plaintiffs' request for addit ional pages to complete their opposition papers is DENIED. Plaintiffs shall comply with the Court's 30-page limitation. Individual Practices in Pro Se Cases Rule IV.D ("[A]ll memoranda of law accompanying any motion (including opposition br iefs) are limited to 30 pages"). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' request for an extension of time to oppose Defendants' motion for summary judgment on this basis is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiffs pro se. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 3/15/2021) (rjm) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.

Case 1:14-cv-07535-AT-DCF Document 309 Filed 03/15/21 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
TZVEE WOOD and ANDREA MALESTER,

USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #: _________________
DATE FILED: 3/15/2021

Plaintiffs,
-against-

14 Civ. 7535 (AT) (DCF)

MUTUAL REDEVELOPMENT HOUSES, INC., et al.,

ORDER

Defendants.
ANALISA TORRES, District Judge:
The Court has reviewed the parties’ submissions at ECF Nos. 307–08.
Fact discovery closed on September 27, 2019. ECF No. 177 at 7. Plaintiffs failed to
obtain affidavits from the two witnesses identified in ECF No. 307 before this deadline, and have
not offered any justification for this failure. Plaintiffs have not provided any facts showing why
testimony from these two witnesses would have been necessary to their arguments, nor have they
provided reasons why alternate witnesses could not provide comparable testimony. ECF Nos.
304, 307. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ request for an extension of time to oppose Defendants’
motion for summary judgment on this basis is DENIED.
After a party submits an affidavit or declaration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 56(d), the Court will then determine whether to (1) deny or defer consideration of the
motion for summary judgment, (2) allow time to obtain affidavits, declarations, or take further
discovery, or (3) issue any other appropriate order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d)(1)–(3). Plaintiffs’
request to receive guidance regarding how the Court will rule prior to submitting such an
affidavit or declaration, therefore, is DENIED.
Plaintiffs shall file digital media by mailing it to the Court’s chambers at the Daniel
Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, Courtroom 15D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY
10007, and shall serve it promptly by mail on Defendants.
Plaintiffs’ request to redact their filings is GRANTED because the proposed redactions
would prevent public disclosure of confidential financial information, personally identifiable
information, and medical information. Plaintiffs shall e-mail unredacted copies of the documents
to [e-mail].
Plaintiffs’ request for additional pages to complete their opposition papers is DENIED.
Plaintiffs shall comply with the Court’s 30-page limitation. Individual Practices in Pro Se Cases
Rule IV.D (“[A]ll memoranda of law accompanying any motion (including opposition briefs) are
limited to 30 pages”). Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ request for an extension of time to oppose
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on this basis is DENIED.

Case 1:14-cv-07535-AT-DCF Document 309 Filed 03/15/21 Page 2 of 2

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiffs pro se.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 15, 2021
New York, New York

2