Gomez v. City of New York, No. 14-3583 (2d Cir. 2015)Annotate this Case
Counsel for plaintiff signed a stipulation dismissing most of plaintiff's claims against defendant. Plaintiff then filed a pro se motion and attached a letter asking the district court to reopen his case because his attorney had filed the stipulation without his knowledge or consent. The district court denied the motion, relying principally on the proposition that each party is deemed bound by the acts of his or her lawyer‐agent under our system of representative litigation. The court concluded that, in this case, plaintiff's motion raised a factual dispute concerning his attorney’s authority to stipulate to a dismissal of his claims and it was necessary to hold an evidentiary hearing to address this dispute. Accordingly, the court vacated the judgment and remanded for further proceedings.