AFAB Industrial Services, Inc. v. Little Chelsea, Inc.
Filing
107
ORDER: Upon finding there are compelling circumstances that could not have been anticipated as of December 12, it is hereby ORDERED that the trial date in this action is ADJOURNED sine die, and this action shall be STAYED. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall submit a joint status letter by March 28, 2025, and every 60 days thereafter, regarding the circumstances warranting the stay. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Margaret M. Garnett on 1/28/2025) (mml)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
1/28/2025
AFAB INDUSTRIAL SERVICES, INC.,
Plaintiff,
-against-
23-CV-03095 (MMG)
LITTLE CHELSEA, INC. d/b/a CHELSEA
EXCLUSIVE,
ORDER
Defendant.
MARGARET M. GARNETT, United States District Judge:
On December 12, 2024, the Court ordered the bench trial in this action to begin today,
January 28, 2025. See Dkt. No. 90. The Court advised the parties in the December 12 Order that
no further extensions or continuances of the trial date would be granted, “absent compelling
circumstances that could not have been anticipated as of the date of [that] Order.” Id.
On January 27, 2025, Plaintiff’s counsel emailed the Court regarding certain
developments relating to his client’s company, requesting a continuance of the trial and a
temporary stay of this action. Defendant and Third-Party Defendant do not oppose Plaintiff’s
request.
Upon finding there are compelling circumstances that could not have been anticipated as
of December 12, it is hereby ORDERED that the trial date in this action is ADJOURNED sine
die, and this action shall be STAYED.
It is further ORDERED that the parties shall submit a joint status letter by March 28,
2025, and every 60 days thereafter, regarding the circumstances warranting the stay.
Dated: January 28, 2025
New York, New York
SO ORDERED.
MARGARET M. GARNETT
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?