Opinion
21 Civ. 5569 (PAE)
03-18-2022
MARCIA SCHORR, Plaintiff v. AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION INC, THE INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION, and SEBASTIAN DOGGART, Defendants.
ORDER
PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, District Judge:
On March 17, 2022, the Court received, via email, a letter from pro se defendant Sebastian Doggart. See Appended Letter. Among other things, Doggart seeks access to ECF and prompt service of process. On February 23, 2022, plaintiff Marcia Schorr filed the second amended complaint, which named Doggart as a defendant for the first time. Dkt. 31. Accordingly, Schorr's deadline for service of process on Doggart is May 24, 2022.
Doggart is to access ECF in the manner identified in his March 17 letter, the timeline for which poses no bar to his timely participation in this case. Doggart shall have 21 days from his formal appearance or acceptance of service-whichever comes first-to tile an answer or motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. If Doggart files a motion to dismiss, Schorr's opposition will be due 14 days thereafter, and Doggart's reply, if any, will be due seven days after that. The Court will resolve the substance of such motion, if filed, in tandem with its resolution of the non-pro se defendants' pending motion to dismiss. See Dkt. 34. The Court declines to address the substance of the remaining assertions made in Doggart's March 17 letter.
To the degree Doggart needs assistance, he is directed to contact the Court's Pro Se Intake Unit at (212) 805-0175, or to visit in person at the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, Room 105, New York, New York 10007, during normal business hours, 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Monday - Friday.
SO ORDERED.
March 17, 2022
Via electronic mail
District Judge Hon. Paul A. Engelmayer
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square
New York, NY 10007
Re case: 21-cv-05569 (PAE)(KHP) - Marcia Schorr vs AAA, Sebastian Doggart et al
Dear Judge Engelmayer:
I write in reference to the aforementioned case, where I am named as a defendant, to inform you of the following information, and to request immediate intervention by the court.
First, neither plaintiff Marcia Schorr or her son David Schorr (who purports to be acting both as attorney and witness in this matter) have served any papers on me, either in person or electronically. It is absurd that I should have to hear about this case through the media - cf today's report in Law 360 at https://www.law360.com/realestate/articles/1474027/arb-assoc-says-agreement-dooms-false-advertising-suit ) Mr Schorr is a licensed attorney and knows full well the rules prohibiting ex parte communications. Flouting the rules on service is most improper. I ask the court to take appropriate action to sanction Mr Schorr, and to instruct him to serve all past and future court filings correctly, and to copy me on all correspondence.
Second, I am unable to access the court filings in this case via Pacer, since I am not an “authorized registered user”. I sought to register yesterday, but have just been advised that I cannot have access to the case file for at least two weeks, since Pacer needs to snail-mail me registration documents, which I then need to return. This will deny me my right and ability to respond to these papers, which is exactly what Mr Schorr is hoping will happen. Please therefore provide me with immediate electronic access to this case file.
Third, I wish to exercise my right to oppose the Schorrs' underlying motion; to support the AAA's motion to dismiss; and to file a counter-claim for costs. I do not have the resources to hire yet another attorney to fight Mr Schorr's newest round of vexatious and frivolous litigation, so have no choice to proceed pro se. I did call the pro se office, but got no reply. Please can you provide me with the information on how I file papers as pro se defendant in this matter, or instruct the pro se office to contact me directly. Please also grant my request for a further two weeks period to prepare my responses and cross-motion.
Finally, I request that the court exercise due diligence and make inquiries about whether Marcia Schorr is indeed the bona fide plaintiff in this case. There have been recent reports that she is either deceased or mentally incapacitated. From my own experience with David Schorr, there are huge doubts about whether Ms Schorr has any idea that these actions are taking place in her name. I have never met or spoken to her, and when I asked Mr Schorr about this, he was clear that he was using her as a straw-man to try and hide assets from his ex-wife and her attorney, Louis Newman esq. During the arbitration process, it became clear that the power of attorney Mr Schorr presented, purportedly signed by Marcia Schorr, was fraudulent. I therefore request that the court request and require that Ms Schorr confirm that she is indeed alive and/or compos mentis, and is the willful plaintiff in this matter, either by zoom call or by phone.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Yours truly