Reem Bridals, LLC v. The Burlington Insurance Company, et al

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

REEM BRIDALS, LLC, 25-cv-7817 (CM) (RFT) Plaintiff, -against- ORDER

THE BURLINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, et al, Defendants.

ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY, United States Magistrate Judge: As discussed at the oral argument held on July 2, 2026: 1. By July 7, 2026, Alterra shall file on the docket a list of any cases cited in its demonstrative displayed during oral argument that was not cited in Alterra’s briefs. 2. By July 10, 2026, Plaintiff shall file a brief letter on the docket addressing my question about how Clarendon Place Corp. v. Landmark Ins. Co., 182 A.D.2d 6, 10 (1st Dep’t 1992) affects Plaintiff's argument about the privity requirement in the context of the res judicata analysis. In that letter, Plaintiff may also address the implications of any of the cases on the list to be provided by Alterra on Plaintiff’s argument about the privity requirement in the context of the res judicata analysis. 3. Alterra may file a one-page response to Plaintiff's letter by July 13, 2026.

DATED: July 2, 2026 SO ORDERED. New York, NY ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY United States Magistrate Judge