Gil et al v. Pizzarotti, LLC et al

Filing 168

MEMO ENDORSEMENT granting 158 Motion to Bifurcate. ENDORSEMENT: GRANTED. The parties have waived trial by jury. The issues of liability and thereafter damages will be tried separately to the Court. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 5/17/2022) (tg)

Case 1:19-cv-03497-MKV Document 168 Filed 05/17/22 Page 1 of 2

Harrison, Harrison & Associates, Ltd.
90 BROAD STREET, 2nd Floor
NEW YORK, NY 10004
DIRECT DIAL [phone]
FAX [phone]

[e-mail]

Address all mail to:
110 Highway 35, Suite 10
Red Bank, NJ 07701

April 28, 2022
VIA ECF
The Honorable Mary Kay Vyskocil
United States District Judge
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street, Room 2230
New York, New York 10007
RE:

USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 5/17/2022

Gil et al. v. Pizzarotti, LLC et al., Case No. 19-cv-03497 (MKV)

Dear Judge Vyskocil:
Our firm represents Plaintiffs in the above referenced matter. We write, jointly with
Defendants Pizzarotti, LLC, Ignazio Campoccia, and Giacomo Di’Nola to respectfully request
that the Court allow the parties to bifurcate the upcoming trial, in accordance with FRCP 42(b).
Under this scheme, the first phase of the trial would focus only on liability. Upon a finding of
liability, the second phase of the trial would focus on damages.
Bifurcation will enable the parties – and the Court – to more efficiently resolve this case, because
bifurcation will narrow the relevant issues to be determined at each phase of the trial. This
narrowed focus will result in the need for the testimony of many fewer witnesses during the
liability phase of the trial than a full trial on both liability and damages would require. Only in
the event of a finding of liability during the first phase, will a second phase trial on the issue of
damages be necessary. See Crown Cork & Seal Co., Inc. Master Retirement Trust v. Credit
Suisse First Boston Corp., 288 F.R.D. 335, 338 (S.D.N.Y., 2013) (“Bifurcation may be
appropriate where ‘the two phases involve[ ] different types of evidence.’ or where “the litigation
of the first issue might eliminate the need to litigate the second issue,”)(citing Amato v. City of
Saratoga Springs, 170 F.3d 311, 316 (2d Cir.1999); Katsaros v. Cody, 744 F.2d 270, 278 (2d
Cir.1984)). Furthermore, because this is a non-jury trial, bifurcating the trial should not present
any issues with bringing back the jury (or seating a second jury).
Assuming the Court grants this request, the parties note that this Order would modify the
Parties responses/submissions to Your Honor’s Rule 7(A) Joint Pretrial Order.
We thank the Court for its attention to this matter.

Case 1:19-cv-03497-MKV Document 168 Filed 05/17/22 Page 2 of 2

Respectfully Submitted,
/S/ DAVID HARRISON
David Harrison
cc: All Counsel of Record (VIA ECF)

GRANTED. The parties have waived trial by jury. The issues of liability and thereafter
damages will be tried separately to the Court. SO ORDERED.

5/17/2022