Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

13-325 - Colon et al v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad Company et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
13-325 - Colon et al v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad Company et al
April 3, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER granting 55 Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge Donna F. Martinez on 4/3/14. (Nichols, J.)
June 30, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER re 69 Amended Complaint filed by Milton Omar Colon, Arlene Davis. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 6/30/3014.(Ramesh, S)
July 28, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER Denying 70 Plaintiff's Rule 72 Objection. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 7/28/2014. (Ramesh, S)
March 13, 2017
PDF | More
RULING ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. For the reasons set forth in the attached ruling, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. #209) is DENIED, and defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. #146) is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED as to wilful, wanton, and reckless conduct. UI's motion for summary judgment (Doc. #206) is GRANTED as to common-law indemnity and apportionment, and DENIED as to contractual indemnity. All motions for sanctions and/or adverse inferences (Docs. #190, #194, #203) are largely denied, save the limited discovery that will be allowed as set forth in this ruling. I also find as moot plaintiff's remaining documents mislabeled on my docket as "motions," including Docs. #182, #202, #219, #263, #264, #269. Plaintiff's counsel is requested to learn how to file and label documents properly on CM/ECF. The parties shall file their joint trial memorandum by May 12, 2017, or within 30 days of completion of the 30(b)(6) depositions as set forth in this ruling. Please refer to the District of Connecticut website for my "Trial Preferences" and "Instructions for Joint Trial Memorandum." Jury selection will be held on July 6, 2017 at 8:30 a.m., with a back-up date of August 3, 2017. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 3/13/2017. (Gruber, Sarah)
April 10, 2017
PDF | More
RULING DENYING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION TO APPEAL AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. For the reasons set forth in the attached ruling, defendants' motion for leave to certify an interlocutory appeal and for a stay of proceedings (Doc. #276) is DENIED, and defendants' motion for reconsideration of the Court's discovery costs/fees order (Doc. #278) is DENIED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/10/2017. (Gruber, Sarah)
June 2, 2017
PDF | More
RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS IN LIMINE. In accordance with the reasons stated on the record during the pretrial conference on June 1, 2017, the Court issues the following orders:(1) Plaintiffs' motion to preclude MTA police reports and/or evidence of copper theft (Doc. #322) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED as to Exh. 515, DENIED as to Exh. 518, and DENIED as to Exh. 516, which will be admitted at trial if defendants lay a proper foundation pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 803(6) or any other exception to the hearsay rules. The motion is DENIED as moot as to Exh. 517, in light of defendants' representation that the exhibit will be used, if at all, only to refresh a witness's recollection, but without prejudice to renewal in the event defendants determine at a later time that they intend, contrary to their representations, to offer the exhibit. The motion to preclude testimony about Colon's possible copper theft or attempt to steal MTA property is GRANTED. Defendants shall not elicit testimony or attempt to show that Colon was on defendants' property to commit a crime or steal copper wire.(2) Plaintiffs' motion in limine to allow various summaries (Doc. #323) is GRANTED in the absence of any suggestion that the summaries are factually inaccurate.(3) Plaintiffs' motion to compel defendants to accept trial subpoenas (Doc. #360) is GRANTED subject to the understanding that defendants will facilitate service of process by setting up a time and place for service of the witnesses, but will not themselves accept service of process. (4) Plaintiffs' motions for judicial notice regarding the authentication of photographs and pediatrician records, and regarding the proximity of schools and playgrounds (Docs. #350, #351, #353) are DENIED without prejudice to renewal in the event the exhibits and testimony have not been admitted through conventional means at trial, i.e., by presenting witnesses and laying a proper foundations, as is custom during a trial. Plaintiffs' motion for judicial notice regarding the unreliability of urine toxicity tests (Doc. #352) is DENIED as not the proper subject of judicial notice. (5) Defendants' motion to preclude testimony of late-disclosed witnesses (Doc. #325) is DENIED, except that defendants are permitted to depose the witnesses identified in the motion within the next 30 days, with each deposition not to exceed two hours in duration. (6) Defendants' motion to preclude evidence regarding the MTA's duty to patrol (Doc. #328) is GRANTED insofar as plaintiffs do not assert that the MTA owed Colon a duty to patrol. The parties remain free to inquire into the MTA's policing activities, and their efficacy, as relevant to other issues in the case. (7) Defendants' motion to preclude evidence about constant intrusion and/or limit the geographic scope of evidence of trespassing (Doc. #331) is DENIED, subject to plaintiffs' representation that physical and testimonial evidence regarding trespass along the right-of-way will be limited, geographically, to within one-mile in either direction of Tower #1043. Evidence from the FRA Casualty Reports will not be limited geographically. (8) Defendants' motion to preclude the testimony of Carl Berkowitz, Ph.D, P.E. (Doc. #332) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED insofar as Berkowitz may not comment on the evidence in a manner not requiring expertise, such as on topics (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of Doc. #371 at 2. The motion is also GRANTED insofar as Berkowitz may not testify about applicable legal standards, such as topic (6) of Doc. #371 at 2, to the extent that such standard is not incorporated into Berkowitz's opinion concerning the industry standard of care. The motion is otherwise DENIED with respect to Berkowitz's opinions about accepted industry standards for the safety precautions at issue, see Doc. #371-2 at 35-37, particularly because defendants do not dispute that Berkowitz is qualified to opine on those standards. Berkowitz may also testify about the application of any accepted industry standards to defendants, and about the use of effective warnings if that use is tied to his testimony on accepted industry standards. If plaintiffs intend to have Berkowitz interpret photographs, they must lay a foundation for why expert testimony is needed, and why Berkowitz is qualified as an expert to interpret those photographs. (9) Defendants' motion to preclude the testimony of Elliot Stern, Ph.D (Doc. #333) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED insofar as Stern may not comment on the evidence in a manner not requiring expertise, such as on topics (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of Doc. #372 at 2. The motion is also GRANTED insofar as Stern may not testify about applicable legal standards, such as topic (6) of Doc. #372 at 2, to the extent that such standard is not incorporated into Berkowitz's opinion concerning the industry standard of care. The motion is otherwise DENIED as to Stern's accident-reconstruction testimony, as well as topics (7) and (8) of Doc. #372 at 2 as they relate to accepted industry standards for electrical issues, with the understanding that defendants have not challenged Stern's expertise in these matters and subject to the same general limits as set forth with respect to Berkowitz. (10) Defendants' motion to preclude photographs obtained by plaintiffs' counsel without defendants' consent (Doc. #340) is DENIED, but defendants may inquire on cross-examination about how the photographs were obtained, if that information is relevant. (11) Defendants' motion to preclude evidence about spoliation of the path (Doc. #343) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED as to any evidence about alleged bad faith conduct or culpability of defendants in covering the path by performing track maintenance, but DENIED so as to allow evidence about the fact that defendants caused the path to be covered if that evidence relates to, for example, inability of expert witnesses to make observations at a certain time. (12) UI's motion to preclude evidence that UI was negligent or owed a duty of care to Colon (Doc. #315) is GRANTED, without prejudice to Metro-Norths ability to assert that any duty it might have owed was instead owed by UI. The remaining pre-trial motions (Docs. #321, #326, #327, #339, #329, #330, #345, #316) have been taken under advisement. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 6/2/2017. (Gruber, Sarah)
August 2, 2017
PDF | More
RULING GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND EXCLUDING FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION CASUALTY REPORTS. For the reasons stated in the attached ruling, defendant's motion for reconsideration (Doc. #411) is GRANTED. The Court excludes from evidence the Federal Railroad Administration casualty reports and related summaries (Plaintiffs Exhibits #27 and #28 and underlying data) as well as any other evidence of injuries along the Metro-North rail line in the absence of a showing that these additional casualty incidents occurred under substantially similar circumstances as the incident at issue in this case. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 8/2/2017. (Black, R.)
August 3, 2017
PDF | More
RULING DENYING DEFENDANT METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY'S MOTION TO DISMISS. For the reasons given in the attached ruling, defendant MTA's motion to dismiss is DENIED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 8/3/2017. (Black, R.)
August 4, 2017
PDF | More
RULING GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING R.C.S.A. § 16-11-102. For the reasons stated in the attached ruling, defendants' motion in limine (Doc. #329) regarding R.C.S.A. § 16-11-102(a) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are precluded from offering at trial any evidence, testimony, or argument regarding R.C.S.A. § 16-11-102. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 8/4/2017. (Black, R.)
August 9, 2017
PDF | More
RULING DENYING MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE ANY EXPERT TESTIMONY THAT U.I.'S TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CAUSED A SENSATION IN MR. COLON AND/OR THAT IT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CAUSED HIS FALL. For the reasons stated in the attached ruling, UI's motion in limine (Doc. #316) is DENIED. Dr. Stern will be permitted to testify concerning his opinions about what caused any electrical shock to plaintiff Colon, including his views concerning the likelihood or probability that UI's wires caused or contributed to any electric shock/sensation experienced by Colon. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 8/9/2017. (Black, R.)
October 13, 2017
PDF | More
RULING ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW AS TO LIABILITY UNDER THE KNOWN TRESPASSER AND CHILD TRESPASSER RULES. For the reasons stated in the attached ruling, defendants Metro-North and MTA's motion for judgment as a matter of law (Doc. #471) is GRANTED as to plaintiffs' claims under the known trespasser and child trespasser rules. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 10/13/2017. (Black, R.)
October 13, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ENTRY OF PARTIAL JUDGMENT. For the reasons stated in the attached order, defendants' motion for entry of judgment (Doc. #[5064) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court shall enter separate judgment with respect to plaintiffs Omar Colon and Arlene Davis's claims against defendants Metro-North and the MTA. Plaintiffs shall thereupon file any post-trial motions that they wish to file within the time limits set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. As for the third-party claim, in accordance with the schedule proposed by Metro-North, MTA, and UI, defendants shall file their briefing by November 30, 2017; UI's briefing by January 15, 2018; and defendants' reply briefing by January 31, 2018. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 10/13/2017. (Black, R.) (Additional attachment(s) added on 10/19/2017: # (2) REPLACEMENT PDF) (Gutierrez, Y.).
May 22, 2018
PDF | More
RULING DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL. For the reasons set forth in the attached ruling, plaintiffs' motion for a new trial (Doc. #511) is DENIED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 5/22/2018. (Black, R.)
May 22, 2018
PDF | More
RULING ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT AS TO THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT. For the reasons stated in the attached ruling, the motion for judgment as to the third-party claim by third-party plaintiffs Metro-North and the MTA (Doc. #514) is DENIED, and the motion for judgment as to the third-party claim by third-party defendant UI (Doc. #520) is GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 5/22/2018. (Black, R.)