Small v. The State of New York et al

Filing 229

ORDER DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to file an amended judgment as specified. Signed by William M. Skretny, United States District Judge on 5/29/2019. (MEAL)- CLERK TO FOLLOW UP -

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK PAMELA S. SMALL, Plaintiff, ORDER 12-CV-1236S v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, CARL CUER, JAMES CONWAY, and SANDRA DOLCE, Defendants. On April 15, 2019, this Court resolved the parties’ post-trial motions that followed a federal jury’s determination that Defendants subjected Plaintiff Pamela S. Small to discrimination and a hostile work environment and unlawfully retaliated against her while she was employed as a civilian teacher at the Attica Correctional Facility (“Attica”). See Small v. New York State Dep’t of Corr. & Cmty. Supervision, 12-CV-1236S, 2019 WL 1593923 (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 15, 2019). Among the issues addressed therein, this Court offered Small a remittitur of the compensatory damages that the jury awarded against Defendant Carl Cuer to $2.88 million. See id. at *10-13. It also affirmed the additional $50,000 punitive damages award against Cuer and found that Small was entitled to $346,371.35 in pre-judgment interest on her state back pay award. See id. at *13-15, *21. Familiarity with that decision is assumed and the findings therein are incorporated by reference. After the decision, the Clerk of Court entered a partial amended judgment pending Small’s decision on remittitur. (Docket No. 222.) Small has now accepted the remittitur 1 and this Court has also resolved her motion for supplemental attorneys’ fees and costs. (See Affidavit of Pamela Small, Docket No. 220-1, ¶ 13 (“ . . . I hereby inform the Court that I accept the remittitur and will not request another trial on damages against Cuer.”); Docket No. 228.) Consequently, the Clerk of Court will once again be directed to enter an amended judgment against all defendants. IT HEREBY IS ORDERED, that the Clerk of Court is directed to file an amended judgment against Defendants New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Carl Cuer, Sandra Dolce, and James Conway as follows: IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendant New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision on Claims 1 and 2 in the amount of $2,488,250.79. FURTHER, that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendant Carl Cuer on Claims 3 and 4 in the amount of $3,276,371.35. FURTHER, that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendant Sandra Dolce on Claim 3 in the amount of $480,000. FURTHER, that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendant James Conway on Claim 3 in the amount of $240,000. FURTHER, that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendants New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Carl Cuer, Sandra Dolce, and James Conway in the amount of $862,395.30 for attorneys’ fees. FURTHER, that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendants New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Carl Cuer, Sandra Dolce, and James 2 Conway in the amount of $50,458.05 for supplemental attorneys’ fees. FURTHER, that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendants New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Carl Cuer, Sandra Dolce, and James Conway in the amount of $100,448.72 for costs. FURTHER, that judgment is entered in Plaintiff’s favor against Defendants New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Carl Cuer, Sandra Dolce, and James Conway in the amount of $3,026.14 for supplemental costs. FURTHER, that post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961 (a) will run from October 11, 2018. SO ORDERED. Dated: May 29, 2019 Buffalo, New York /s/William M. Skretny WILLIAM M. SKRETNY United States District Judge 3

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?