Rodriguez v. Pataki

207 F. Supp. 2d 123, 53 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1416, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18812
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rodriguez v. Pataki. Read the opinion of the Court — 308 F. Supp. 2d 346
District Court, S.D. New York·Decided April 25, 2002·No. No. 02 CIV. 0618(RMB)·Published

Opinion

BERMAN, District Judge.

Counsel for the parties are requested forthwith to “meet and confer” (by phone or in person) in order to develop a joint list of 3-6 independent experts, i.e. mutually acceptable, who might assist a Special 'Master, appointed pursuant, to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53, in the development of a redistricting plan for the State of New York, dividing the State into twenty-nine congressional districts in accordance with the 2000 federal census and applicable law. '

Because time is of the 'essence, such joint list, along with the experts’ curriculum vitae and credentials, shall be submitted to each of the three-judge court members no later than 4:00 p.m. on Monday, April 29, 2002. '

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

Rodriguez v. Pataki, 207 F. Supp. 2d 123, 53 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1416, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18812 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).

207 F. Supp. 2d 123 (Rodriguez v. Pataki) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.