Abraham v. Leigh et al, No. 1:2017cv05429 - Document 602 (S.D.N.Y. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER denying without prejudice 593 Letter Motion to Compel. After reviewing the docket, it is the Court's view that Plaintiff's amended notices of appeal (see Dkt. #591, 594-95), have not cured her untimely attempt to appeal the Court 's September 14, 2020 Opinion and Order (see Dkt. #539). The Court understands further that Plaintiff's recent conversations with the Clerk of Court (see Dkt. #596), pertain to the mechanics of how notices of appeal are filed and transmitte d to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, but not to the issue of timeliness vel non of individual orders that she seeks to appeal.The Court is also aware that Plaintiff has filed a motion at the Second Circuit to amend her noti ce of appeal to account for clerical error. This Court will not opine on the merits of a motion pending before another court, but calls to Plaintiff's attention Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4)-(5). Thus, to the Court's knowledge , there is no proper appeal of the Court's September 14, 2020 Opinion and Order currently pending before the Second Circuit. Plaintiff's response to Defendant's pending motion for civil contempt (see Dkt. #573), shall therefore be due on or before November 23, 2020. The Court is also in receipt of Ms. Kerwick's letters dated November 12,2020, and November 16, 2020, regarding Plaintiff's filings at the SecondCircuit. (Dkt. #593, 601). The Court reiterates that the most se nsitive materialthat Plaintiff has filed regarding Ms. Kerwick, Ms. Wiss, Wiss & Partners,and/or Plaintiff's relationship with them, would be irrelevant to any of herclaims on appeal. (See Dkt. #583). However, the Court does not believe thatits October 21, 2020 Order controls Plaintiff's filings before another court (seeid.), and therefore Ms. Kerwick's motion to compel compliance with that Orderis denied without prejudice. That said, nothing prevents the Leigh Defendants'cou nsel from advising the Second Circuit of this procedural history andendeavoring to keep sealed at the Court of Appeals what this Court has strivento keep sealed at the District Court.The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket entry593. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 11/16/2020) (rro)

Download PDF
Abraham v. Leigh et al Doc. 602 Case 1:17-cv-05429-KPF Document 602 Filed 11/16/20 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ROBYN ABRAHAM, Plaintiff, 17 Civ. 5429 (KPF) -v.ORDER ABBY LEIGH, et al., Defendants. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge: After reviewing the docket, it is the Court’s view that Plaintiff’s amended notices of appeal (see Dkt. #591, 594-95), have not cured her untimely attempt to appeal the Court’s September 14, 2020 Opinion and Order (see Dkt. #539). The Court understands further that Plaintiff’s recent conversations with the Clerk of Court (see Dkt. #596), pertain to the mechanics of how notices of appeal are filed and transmitted to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, but not to the issue of timeliness vel non of individual orders that she seeks to appeal. The Court is also aware that Plaintiff has filed a motion at the Second Circuit to amend her notice of appeal to account for clerical error. This Court will not opine on the merits of a motion pending before another court, but calls to Plaintiff’s attention Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4)-(5). Thus, to the Court’s knowledge, there is no proper appeal of the Court’s September 14, 2020 Opinion and Order currently pending before the Second Circuit. Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s pending motion for civil contempt (see Dkt. #573), shall therefore be due on or before November 23, 2020. Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:17-cv-05429-KPF Document 602 Filed 11/16/20 Page 2 of 2 The Court is also in receipt of Ms. Kerwick’s letters dated November 12, 2020, and November 16, 2020, regarding Plaintiff’s filings at the Second Circuit. (Dkt. #593, 601). The Court reiterates that the most sensitive material that Plaintiff has filed regarding Ms. Kerwick, Ms. Wiss, Wiss & Partners, and/or Plaintiff's relationship with them, would be irrelevant to any of her claims on appeal. (See Dkt. #583). However, the Court does not believe that its October 21, 2020 Order controls Plaintiff’s filings before another court (see id.), and therefore Ms. Kerwick’s motion to compel compliance with that Order is denied without prejudice. That said, nothing prevents the Leigh Defendants’ counsel from advising the Second Circuit of this procedural history and endeavoring to keep sealed at the Court of Appeals what this Court has striven to keep sealed at the District Court. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 593. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 16, 2020 New York, New York __________________________________ KATHERINE POLK FAILLA United States District Judge 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.