From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shafer v. Stanley

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Mar 3, 2021
Civil Action 1:20-cv-11047 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 3, 2021)

Opinion

Civil Action 1:20-cv-11047

03-03-2021

MATTHEW T. SHAFER, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Plaintiff, v. MORGAN STANLEY, MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC, MORGAN STANLEY COMPENSATION MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUCCESSION COMMITTEE, and John/Jane Does 1-20, Defendants.

Robert A. Izard (pro hac vice) Mark P. Kindall (pro hac vice) Douglas P. Needham IZARD, KINDALL & RAABE LLP Mathew P. Jasinski William H. Narwold MOTLEY RICE LLC David S. Siegel (pro hac vice) John S. “Jack” Edwards, Jr. (pro hac vice) Dona Szak (pro hac vice) AJAMIE LLP Thomas R. Ajamie AJAMIE LLP


CLASS ACTION

Robert A. Izard (pro hac vice)

Mark P. Kindall (pro hac vice)

Douglas P. Needham

IZARD, KINDALL & RAABE LLP

Mathew P. Jasinski

William H. Narwold

MOTLEY RICE LLC

David S. Siegel (pro hac vice)

John S. “Jack” Edwards, Jr. (pro hac vice)

Dona Szak (pro hac vice)

AJAMIE LLP

Thomas R. Ajamie

AJAMIE LLP

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL NAMED PLAINTIFFS AND PROPOSED CLASS REPRESENTATIVES

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff Matthew T. Shafer will respectfully move this Court before the Honorable Paul G. Gardephe, at the United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, Courtroom 705, New York, New York 10007, at such time as counsel may be heard, to join as additional named plaintiffs and proposed class representatives (1) Sheri Haugabook, (2) Peter Heidt, (3) Randall Powers, (4) Jeffrey Shover, and (5) Mace Tamse, pursuant to Rule 20(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The grounds supporting the Motion are set forth in the accompanying Memorandum of Law.

Defendants' counsel have informed the undersigned that Defendants do not plan to file an opposition to this Motion, provided that Plaintiff include the following statement:

In accordance with Section IV.C of the Court's Individual Rules of Practice, Plaintiff is therefore filing the Motion on ECF without awaiting a response.

Defendants oppose the addition of these plaintiffs through joinder without pleading allegations supporting their claims but, while reserving all arguments respecting the arbitrability, implausibility, and lack of merit of the plaintiffs' claims, do not oppose the addition of these individuals as plaintiffs through a properly pleaded amended complaint.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant his Motion for Joinder of Additional Named Plaintiffs and Proposed Class Representatives.

MEMO ENDORSED


Summaries of

Shafer v. Stanley

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Mar 3, 2021
Civil Action 1:20-cv-11047 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 3, 2021)
Case details for

Shafer v. Stanley

Case Details

Full title:MATTHEW T. SHAFER, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Mar 3, 2021

Citations

Civil Action 1:20-cv-11047 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 3, 2021)