Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Date: 05-01-2023
Case Style:
Case Number: 1:23-cv-01264
Judge: Jesse M. Furman
Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney: No appearance
Description: New York, New York civil rights lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendant on Americans with Disabilities Act - Discrimination theory.
"Section 42 U.S. Code § 12132 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. A public entity is a State or local government, or any department, agency, or instrumentality of a State or local government.
The ADA prohibits public entities from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities in the following areas:
Admissions and services provided by public schools and public colleges and universities
Employment by public agencies
Voting
Public transportation
Public accommodations and services operated by public entities
State and local government programs, services, and activities
The ADA also requires public entities to make reasonable modifications to their policies and procedures to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of public services, programs, and activities.
If you believe that you have been discriminated against by a public entity on the basis of disability, you may file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice. You may also file a private lawsuit against the public entity.
The ADA is an important law that protects the rights of people with disabilities. Section 42 U.S. Code § 12132 of the ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. This section of the ADA is an important tool for ensuring that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of public services, programs, and activities."
Google Bard
Outcome: 05/01/2023 9 ORDER. In light of the parties' letter reporting a settlement in principle (ECF 8), the Initial Case Management Conference scheduled for May 10, 2023, is ADJOURNED sine die. (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang) (Text Only Order) (jhw) (Entered: 05/01/2023)
05/01/2023 10 ORDER OF DISMISSAL The Court having been advised at ECF No. 8 that all claims asserted herein have been settled in principle, it is ORDERED that the above-entitled action be and is hereby DISMISSED and discontinued without costs, and without prejudice to the right to reopen the action within sixty days of the date of this Order if the settlement is not consummated. To be clear, any application to reopen must be filed by the aforementioned deadline; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, requests to extend the deadline to reopen are unlikely to be granted. If the parties wish for the Court to retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court by the deadline to reopen to be "so ordered" by the Court. Per Paragraph 5.B of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases, unless the Court orders otherwise, the Court will not retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement unless it is made part of the public record. Any pending motions are moot. All conferences are canceled. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/1/2023) (jca) (Entered: 05/01/2023)
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: