From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stone v. Fisher

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 31, 2021
20-CV-1818 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2021)

Opinion

20-CV-1818 (JMF)

08-31-2021

PATRICK STONE, Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH FISHER, Defendant.


ORDER

JESSE M. FURMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On August 30, 2021, Plaintiff requested a stay of the Court's consideration of the summary judgment motion filed by Defendant. See ECF No. 87. On August 31, Defendant filed a letter opposing the stay. See ECF No. 89. Plaintiff's request for a stay is hereby DENIED because, among other things, Plaintiff fails to provide any basis for granting a stay. See also, e.g., Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse Corp. v. Esprit De Corp., 769 F.2d 919, 926 (2d Cir. 1985) (“Rule 56 . . . requires the opponent of a motion for summary judgment who claims to be unable to produce evidence in opposition to the motion to file an affidavit explaining: 1) the nature of the uncompleted discovery, i.e., what facts are sought and how they are to be obtained; and 2) how those facts are reasonably expected to create a genuine issue of material fact; and 3) what efforts the affiant has made to obtain those facts; and 4) why those efforts were unsuccessful.”). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 87.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Stone v. Fisher

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 31, 2021
20-CV-1818 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2021)
Case details for

Stone v. Fisher

Case Details

Full title:PATRICK STONE, Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH FISHER, Defendant.

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

Date published: Aug 31, 2021

Citations

20-CV-1818 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2021)