• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
9 results

Monteagudo v. United States of America

Docket 21-2770, U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (Nov. 4, 2021)
Motor Vehicle (Appeals)
Case Type2350 Motor Vehicle
Tags2350 Vehicle, 2350 Vehicle
Plaintiff - Appellant Victor Monteagudo
Defendant - Appellee United States of America
Defendant Patrick Braccia
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 86 JUDGMENT MANDATE, ISSUED.[3466614] [21-2770] [Entered: 02/09/2023 01:17 PM]

Document Monteagudo v. United States of America, 21-2770, No. 86 (2d Cir. Feb. 9, 2023)
Motion for Judgment
At the conclusion of the parties’ presentation of evidence, the district court entered judgment for the United States, finding that Monteagudo failed to establish that his asserted injuries were caused Case 21-2770, Document 86-1, 02/09/2023, 3466614, Page3 of 7 by the accident.
Under the clear-error standard, “there is a strong presumption in favor of a trial court’s findings of fact,” which we “will not upset ... unless we are left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” Travellers Int’l, A.G. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 41 F.3d 1570, 1574 (2d Cir. 1994) (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also id. at 1574–75 (“Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder’s choice between them cannot be clearly erroneous.” (internal quotation marks omitted)).
Thus, when a district court’s “[factual] finding is based on [its] decision to credit the testimony of [a witness who] ... has told a coherent and facially plausible story that is not contradicted by Case 21-2770, Document 86-1, 02/09/2023, 3466614, Page4 of 7 extrinsic evidence, that finding, if not internally inconsistent, can virtually never be clear error.” Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 575 (1985).
Here, the district court found that Monteagudo failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his injuries were proximately caused by his collision with the USPS truck.
The district court also questioned the veracity of Dr. Rovner’s testimony, given that he had formed his impression before reviewing Monteagudo’s prior medical records.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 77 SUMMARY ORDER AND JUDGMENT, the judgment of the district court is affirmed, by RDS, RJS, MHP, ...

Document Monteagudo v. United States of America, 21-2770, No. 77 (2d Cir. Dec. 15, 2022)
At the conclusion of the parties’ presentation of evidence, the district court entered judgment for the United States, finding that Monteagudo failed to establish that his asserted injuries were caused by the accident.
Under the clear-error standard, “there is a strong presumption in favor of a trial court’s findings of fact,” which we “will not upset ... unless we are left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” Travellers Int’l, A.G. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 41 F.3d 1570, 1574 (2d Cir. 1994) (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also id. at 1574–75 (“Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder’s choice between them cannot be clearly erroneous.” (internal quotation marks omitted)).
Thus, when a district court’s “[factual] finding is based on [its] decision to credit the testimony of [a witness who] ... has told a coherent and facially plausible story that is not contradicted by extrinsic evidence, that finding, if not internally inconsistent, can virtually never be clear error.” Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 575 (1985).
Here, the district court found that Monteagudo failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his injuries were proximately caused by his collision with the USPS truck.
The district court also questioned the veracity of Dr. Rovner’s testimony, given that he had formed his impression before reviewing Monteagudo’s prior medical records.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 85 STATEMENT OF COSTS, on behalf of Appellee United States of America, FILED.[3466607] [21-2770] ...

Document Monteagudo v. United States of America, 21-2770, No. 85 (2d Cir. Feb. 9, 2023)
At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 9th day of February, two thousand twenty-three,
Docket No. 21-2770 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that costs are taxed in the amount of $115.06 in favor of the Appellee.
For the Court: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 82 ITEMIZED BILL OF COSTS, on behalf of Appellee United States of America, FILED

Document Monteagudo v. United States of America, 21-2770, No. 82 (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2022)
Case 21-2770, Document 82, 12/20/2022, 3440242, Page1 of 2 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Thurgood Marshall U.S.
Date: December 15, 2022 Docket #: 21-2770cv Short Title: Monteagudo v. United States of America
respectfully submits, pursuant to FRAP 39 (c) the within bill of costs and requests the Clerk to prepare an itemized statement of costs taxed against the
Appellate Consulting and Management 229 West 36th Street, 8th Floor | New York, NY 10018 Telephone: 212.619.4949 | Fax: 212.608.3141
We certify that the stated charges are based on the necessary copies needed to serve and file.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE, on behalf of Appellee United States of America, FILED

Document Monteagudo v. United States of America, 21-2770, No. 5 (2d Cir. Nov. 8, 2021)
Monteagudo v. United States of America Short Title:
VARUNI NELSON, Assistant United States Attorney Lead Counsel of Record (name/firm) or Pro se Party (name): United States Attorney's Office - Eastern District of New York - 271-A Cadman Plaza East - 7th Floor - Brooklyn, New York 11201 United States of America -- Defendant-Appellee Appearance for (party/designation):
Please change the following parties= designations: Party Correct Designation Contact Information for Lead Counsel/Pro Se Party is: ( ) Correct ✔ ( ) Incorrect or Incomplete.
As an e-filer, I have updated my contact information in the PACER AManage My Account@ screen.
( ) Matters related to this appeal or involving the same issue have been or presently are before this Court.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 2 DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT, dated 10/22/2021, RECEIVED.[3205808] [21-2770] [Entered: 11/04/2021 ...

Document Monteagudo v. United States of America, 21-2770, No. 2 (2d Cir. Nov. 4, 2021)
Civil Action No. 2:17-cv-00813 (DG) (SIL) The court has ordered that (check one): 0 the plaintiff (name) defendant (name) interest at the rate of dollars ($ ____ %,plus post judgment interest at the rate of recover from the the amount of ), which includes prejudgment % per annum, along with costs.
Based on the Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, judgment is granted in favor of Defendant the United States of America.
without a jury and the above decision 0 decided by Judge on a motion for Date: 10/22/21
) Danielle Henderson being duly sworn, deposes and says: I am over 18 years of age, I am not a party to the action, and I reside in Kings County in the State ofNew York.
I served a true copy of the annexed Notice of Appeal on November 4, 2021 via NYSCEF, addressed to the last known address of the addressee as indicated below: Megan J. Freismuth, Esq. Ekta R. Dharia, Esq. Diane Leonardo, Esq.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 4 ELECTRONIC INDEX, in lieu of record, FILED.[3205811] [21-2770] [Entered: 11/04/2021 12:34 PM]

Document Monteagudo v. United States of America, 21-2770, No. 4 (2d Cir. Nov. 4, 2021)
Case 21-2770, Document 4-1, 11/04/2021, 3205811, Page1 of 1 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Thurgood Marshall U.S.
Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007
Date: November 04, 2021 Docket #: 21-2770 Short Title: Monteagudo v. United States of America
In the above referenced case the document indicated below has been filed in the Court.
____ Record on Appeal - Certified List ____ Record on Appeal - CD ROM ____ Record on Appeal - Paper Documents __X__ Record on Appeal - Electronic Index
cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 >>