| Flushing Law
Firm Flubbed Depositions In SDNY On Sushi
Sushi Holdings New Order
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC
- Guardian
UK - Honduras
- ESPN
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
April 16 – In March 2019 the
law firm of Hang and
Associates PLLC based in
Flushing, Queens sued Sushi
Sushi Holdings on behalf of
Ricardo Cajero Torres, Mario
Bautista and others.
Then they
did... very little. At least,
they did not request or
conduct depositions of
defendants Igor Grinberg and
Angie "Doe."
On December
23 U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer held
a proceeding. Inner City Press
covered it.
Judge
Engelmayer asked the Hang
& Associates lawyer why he
had not done deposition before
discovery closed in January
2020. He replied about the
pandemic but Judge Engelmayer
cut it, to say don't try to
use the pandemic that
way.
After the
defense lawyer tried to
capitalize on this new
development, Judge Engelmayer
said he was ordering the
partners involved at Hang
& Associate to submitted
sworn statements about their
conduct, calling it well below
the standards in this
District.
The phrase
malpractice was used, as the
case was referred back to
Magistrate Judge Robert W.
Lehrburger.
On April 6, 2021
the case resurfaced before
Judge Engelmayer, and Inner
City Press again covered it.
Judge Engelmayer
expressed frustration at the
plaintiffs' failure to
prosecute, or even file a
motion for default; he took
the pro se defendant Igor
Greenberg to task for claiming
he wasn't really blaming his
prior lawyer(s).
Greenberg said
the plaintiffs are making too
large a financial demand, as
if they assume he is hiding
money in mattress. Judge
Engelmayer said the case is
not a good look for the
lawyers, or the legal
profession.
On April 16,
Judge Engelmayer ordered:
"plaintiffs are directed, by
April 23, 2021, to identify
the basis in admissible
evidence, if any, for finding
Cortes's FLSA claims to be
timely and, in any event, the
basis, if any, for exercising
supplemental jurisdiction over
any timely New York Labor Law
claims asserted by Cortes. If
plaintiffs cannot do so, the
Court intends to dismiss all
of Cortes's claims. The Court
has also received a letter
from defendant Igor Grinberg
regarding plaintiffs' pending
motion in limine and the
propriety of each party's use
of certain documents as
exhibits at trial.... In
addition, in his most recent
letter, Grinberg asserts that
the documents plaintiffs
provided to him after the
settlement conference do not
reflect those identified in
plaintiffs' portion of the
proposed joint pretrial order.
Id. He therefore seeks to
preclude plaintiffs from
introducing the exhibits they
describe in that order, but
have not yet produced to
defendants. Id. The Court
cannot discern from the
present record which
documents, if any, were
provided by each side to the
other during discovery in this
case, or more recently. In
order to facilitate the
resolution of the pending
disputes over trial exhibits,
the parties are directed to
file on the docket of this
case (1) a copy of each of
their proposed trial exhibits,
as well as (2) proof of each
instance in which they contend
that they produced each
document to the other side,
both during discovery and
since its close. Such filings
are also due by April 23,
2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on
4/16/2021)."
The case is
Cajero Torres et al v. Sushi
Sushi Holdings Inc.,
19-cv-2532 (Engelmayer)
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2021 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
