Lenzo v. City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 11, 2024·No. 1:21-cv-00306·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK wee KX TORY LENZO, : Plaintiff, : 21-CV- 306 (JMF) -v- : MEMORANDUM OPINION : AND ORDER CITY OF NEW YORK, : Defendant. : wee KX JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: On January 3, 2024, Plaintiff submitted a letter addressed to the Chief Judge, a copy of which is attached to this Order, requesting that the Court “totally remove[]” this case from public records and/or that his name be redacted “in public court searches online and any other public records including the physical courthouse.” The Chief Judge referred the request to the undersigned given that it pertains to an assigned case. Plaintiff’s letter is identical to the one he submitted on September 13, 2023. See ECF No. 42, at 3. Accordingly, Plaintiff's request is DENIED substantially for the reasons set forth in the Court’s September 14, 2023 Order. See id. at 1-2. Plaintiff is cautioned that if he files additional frivolous motions or motions for the same relief that sanctions may be imposed. This Court certifies, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and in forma pauperis status is thus denied. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 11, 2024 New York, New York JESS “FURMAN nited States District Judge

Justice Swaine, i am requesting that a ny federal case be totally removed from public records and or sealed and that my name is redacted full from a public record both online and in public court searches online or any other public records including the physical courthouse - tory lenzo vs city of new york et al 21CV00306 - in NY federal court. The backstory on this matter is an ex-girlfriend wrote a police report about me that lacked fact. Claimant had history as well of filing other family case which also lacked fact and was dismissed - proof enclosed. This case was sealed. Then a federal case was begun in order to show all the proofs of all the lies that occurred against me + holding the city at the time responsible for not utilizing MD5# analysis to check for the person’s cropping of messages, authenticating information, and counting up simple statements made like text quantity allegation of which we proved through cell phone tower data was false so on so forth. You are welcome to cross reference the evidence we provided in the case against what was said about me as neede but i doubt you have time for this or desire - I will not bore you with all the details of what occurred unto me but suffice it to say case | was sealed and this is my rationale for why I am writing to you (initial case regarding the sealed record request sealed by barkat epstein attorney aida leisenring). The city of new york in turn during the federal case made a sealed record request to view documents that are sealed which i have attached in this document. Now - the case has ended sadly i was unable to accomplish my ends in this case. However now since 7 websites and pacer have picked up the case online and are displaying it all over the internet which has been available on google upon searching my name (leagle.com, castext.com, law360.com, justia.com, pacer.gov, pacermonitor.com, courtlistener.com, unicourt.com. I have included some of the links. They have told me the only way to remove this information from the public eye is to contact the courts (info that is sealed regarding my initial situation), I do not believe i need to suffer further reputational damage throughout my life regarding this, Already - a new girlfriend searched my on google once to her alarm this situation which i really did not even do the things alleged of me anyways was very shocked this situation occurred. Future business associates may be alarmed at the situation without my ability (or desire) to explain the situation at whole and instead they may judge me off a quick glance online. I do not believe the sealed information should be for everyone to see. In turn I am requesting the case be either or removed from public view or sealed and also full name redaction, Also any letter stating the seal or removal so that the 8 websites remove the federal case online for good would be duly appreciated. Some (not all) example urls harming my reputation: □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ vy City of New York https.//www leavle □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 10419456 @ □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ S4dEM GG minutes age) tpt } vhs Ainiatve ‘Office of the United States Courts provides PACER services on behalf of the judicéal branch of the US federal government, The documents the courts make available on their servers are putlic recerds, Accordingly, PACER cannot cemove them. To have it remaved from the courts’ server you will need to contact the court bo make the request. For court contact information, please consult MAL esceurts gavabslt-federat couns/ federal courts: pubte/coust website Anke Thank you, PACER Service Center Enterprise Operation Center tone: 800-676-5856 Frequent Questions: bhipeAieacer uacolits cou hele ey Accaunt Information: □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ Geum account SE ned manage my-arcaun login, Changing the way we serve the Judiciary Sincerely, ‘tory Lenzo - 2034410872 - mailing address 16 greenwich ave greenwich ct 06830

Wass Na RN ess The City of New York JAMES &, JOHNSON LAW DEPARTMENT □□ □□□□ Corporation Counsel 100 CHURCH STREET Fax: 212-356-345 NEW YORK, N.Y. 10007 wsimpson@law nyc. □ April 15, 2021 Galen J. Criscione, Esq. CRISCIONE RAVALA LLP 250 Park Avenue, 7th Floor New York, NY 10077 Re: Tory Lenzo v. The City of New York, et al 21CV00306 Dear Mr. Criscione: On March 10, 2021, this office forwarded to your attention a “Designation of Agent for Access to Sealed Records Pursuant to NYCPL §§ 160.50 and 160.55,” so that the records pertaining to the plaintiffs arrest could be unsealed and so that this lawsuit could preceed in a timely fashion. To date, we have received neither a signed designation nor a response to our previous letter, As you have been informed, until the executed designation is received by this office, we cannot secure the relevant documents. Consequently, we have been unable to properly assess this case, or to respond to the complaint or discovery requests. Your failure to promptly return this designation continues to delay this litigation. Unless the executed and completed designation including the title of the proceeding, date of the arrest and docket or indictment number is returned to this office within seven days of the date of this letter, we will make application to the Court for an order compelling the production of the executed designation.For your convenience, I have enclosed an other designation form. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter, Very truly yours,

LO IWwpsom UAbekl Winnifred Simpson Paralegal Special Federal Litigation Division Enc. ec; Andrey Udalov Assistant Corporation Counsel

DESIGNATION OF AGENT FOR ACCESS TO SEALED RECORDS PURSUANT TO NYCPL 160.50 AND 160.55

I, Tory Lenzo, Date of Birth / of SS# - pursuant to CPL $§ 160.50 and 160.55, hereby designate JAMES E, JOHNSON, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, or his authorized representative, as my agent to whom records of the criminal action terminated in my favor entitled People of the State of New York v.Tory Lenzo, Docket No. or Indictment No. _. Court, County of ; State of New York, relating to my arrest on or about December 6, 2018, may be made available.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Lenzo v. City of New York, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Lenzo v. City of New York (Lenzo v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)