From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 30, 2021
03-MD-1570 (GBD)(SN) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2021)

Opinion

03-MD-1570 (GBD)(SN)

08-30-2021

IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001


ORDER

SARAH NETBURN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This document relates to:

Burnett, et al. v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, et al., No. 15-cv-9903 (GBD)(SN) All motions for personal injury damages

On August 9, 2021, 51 plaintiffs in Burnett, et al. v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, et al., No. 15-cv-9903 (GBD)(SN) (Dec. 18, 2015), filed the fifth motion for personal injury damages. ECF No. 7005. The Court has begun its review of the plaintiffs' motion and directs them to clarify the following four items:

1. Party Status. The Court has been unable to locate Edward Joseph Prince, Angel Ortiz, his personal representative, or Kathleen Stanton on the Burnett docket (15-cv-9903) or the main multidistrict litigation docket (03-md-1570). Parties must be before the Court in order to obtain a judgment for damages. See ECF No. 5910. The plaintiffs shall direct the Court to the amendment or complaint bringing these parties before the Court or file a notice of amendment to remedy this issue.
2. Citizenship Records. The citizenship information submitted for Richard Martin Bylicki, Frank Castrogiovanni, and Leileth Foster is insufficient. The materials in the relevant exhibits are illegible or do not appear to be reliable copies of the document. The plaintiffs shall submit legible copies of these materials.
3. Sealed Records. The Court has identified two items in its review that do not appear to be properly sealed: Mr. Frank Castrogiovanni's victim impact statement and evidence of Ms. Rafaela Martinez's presence at Ground Zero. The plaintiffs shall either file these materials on the public docket or explain to the Court why they need to be filed under seal.
4. Compensation Fund Ineligibility. Quinceyann Booker-Jackson, Joel Council, and Rafaela Martinez either report being deemed ineligible for compensation from the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund but do not explain why they were found ineligible, or report filing a compensation claim but do not report the outcome of that claim. These plaintiffs shall make a supplemental filing explaining why they were deemed ineligible or the outcome of their applications as applicable.

The plaintiffs shall file the necessary materials or make any amendments required by September 22, 2021.

Finally, the Court offers two further observations that will improve the processing of personal injury recommendations going forward. First, plaintiffs submitting medical records to support motions for personal injury damages must include pin cites directing the Court to the particular part of the medical record that supports the plaintiff's claimed injuries.

Second, if a plaintiff has been determined to be ineligible for the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund, there must be an explanation for why they were found ineligible.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 30, 2021
03-MD-1570 (GBD)(SN) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2021)
Case details for

In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001

Case Details

Full title:IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001

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

Date published: Aug 30, 2021

Citations

03-MD-1570 (GBD)(SN) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2021)