Case Activity (1034)

1. Order | Filed: January 12, 2026 | Entered: January 12, 2026 Antar v. Grossman et al

   Civil Rights: Other | Connecticut

   Order on Motion to Stay

   ORDER: Plaintiff's motion for a stay (ECF No. 746) of proceedings pending resolution of her judicial disqualification motion (ECF No. 744) is DENIED as moot because I have denied the latter motion.
   
   Signed by Judge Michael P Shea on 1/12/2026. (Nelson, D)

2. Order | Filed: January 12, 2026 | Entered: January 12, 2026 Antar v. Grossman et al

   Civil Rights: Other | Connecticut

   Order on Motion to Vacate

   ORDER: Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the order of dismissal (ECF No. 743) is DENIED.  The motion appears to be based on a misreading of the Court’s dismissal order (ECF No. 716).  Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertions, the dismissal order did not dismiss this action because Plaintiff refused to appear and testify at a Section 341 Meeting in the Bankruptcy Court.  Instead, the order dismissed this action for the reasons set forth in ECF No. 701, an order Plaintiff also appears to misread, at least insofar as she states it is “an order denying prior motions as moot due to the then-pending bankruptcy stay.”  ECF No. 743 at 13.  The order at ECF No. 701 does not deny any prior motions as moot due to the then-pending bankruptcy; to the contrary, it explains in detail why the Court found dismissal of this action to be warranted under Rule 41(b).  Plaintiff is also incorrect in suggesting that she did not receive notice that her case would be dismissed if she failed to comply with the Court’s orders.  In fact, on July 24, 2024, the Court issued an order in boldface type noting Plaintiff’s failure to comply with its order, requiring that she do so by July 26, and warning her that the lawsuit might be dismissed if she again failed to comply.  Plaintiff’s other arguments lack merit and have been addressed previously.

   Signed by Judge Michael P Shea on 1/12/2026. (Nelson, D)

3. 1032 additional result(s)