Summary
Granting defendants' motions to hold plaintiffs in contempt for repeated violations of court order enjoining plaintiff from instituting any further actions.
Summary of this case from Friedman v. WallachOpinion
02 Civ. 3262 (WK)
July 16, 2002
Joel Klapper, Brentwood, New York, Plaintiff — Pro Se.
Robert Ernst, Esq., Verizon Communications, Inc., Verizon Legal Department, New York, New York, Attorneys for Defendant Verizon Communications, Inc.
Robert D. Owen, Esq., Owen Davis P.C., New York, New York, Attorney for Defendant ATT Corp.
ORDER
Currently before us are defendants' motions seeking: (1) to dismiss plaintiff's complaint, which purports to seek relief, under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, from three separate orders issued by other judges in this district dismissing actions brought by plaintiff entitled: (a) Joel North v. New York Telephone Co. (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 1980) 1980 WL 1972, 80 Civ. 1028, 80 Civ. 1227 (Conner, J.); (b) Morgan Consultants v. ATT Co. (S.D.N.Y. 1982) 546 F. Supp. 844, 81 Civ. 1690, 81 Civ. 2822 (Owen, J.); and (c) Joel North v. New York Telephone, Co. (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 1998) 97 Civ. 6754 (SAS) (Patterson, J.), and from Judge Owen's order in Morgan Consultants, enjoining plaintiff from instituting any further actions arising from the facts at issue; (2) sanctioning plaintiff for contempt in his repeated violations of Judge Owen's injunction; (3) awarding attorney's fees for plaintiff's vexatious litigation; and (4) any further relief this Court deems to be just and proper.
For the reasons stated in the briefs submitted on behalf of the defendants, we GRANT defendants' motions and dismiss plaintiff's complaint in its entirety. We further sanction plaintiff for his repeated violations of Judge Owen's injunction. In addition, we invite defendants to submit letter briefs on or before August 1, 2002 detailing what would constitute an appropriate award of attorney's fees in this case.