Gabriel W. Gorenstein
How Judge Gorenstein decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Gorenstein treated prejudgment interest on a New York quantum-meruit award as mandatory where the jury's award was purely compensatory.
“Accordingly, Stillman is entitled to recover prejudgment interest against defendants in the amount of 9% on the jury award of $132,724.00 for the period from April 28, 2005, until entry of judgment.”
Procedural preferences
For remote depositions, he was willing to use videoconferencing when international travel created substantial practical and safety burdens, while setting a prompt completion deadline.
“Any deposition of Aly shall be conducted by videoconference. The deposition shall take place within the next 21 days.”
He declined to shift travel costs for out-of-district depositions where the witnesses held critical information, travel was manageable, and the amount at stake made the expense proportionate.
“The circumstances here do not favor the shifting of costs.”
He distinguished protected Suspicious Activity Reports from underlying investigatory materials and required a document-specific showing before withholding the latter.
“BOC's invocation of the SAR prohibition is rejected as to investigatory documents.”
Cautions
Spoliation sanctions required proof of culpability and relevance; a single inadvertent deletion contrary to preservation instructions did not establish bad faith or gross negligence, especially where the email was recovered from another party.
“the mere fact that a single email was deleted in contravention of the instruction to preserve does not reflect either bad faith, the intentional destruction of evidence, or gross negligence.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, CFI's motion for sanctions (Docket # 121) is denied. Plaintiffs request for attorneys' fees is similarly denied.”
“Plaintiff shall have judgment against defendants InService America, Inc. and Wildfire Partners, Inc. for $132,724.00 plus prejudgment interest of $32.73 per day from April 28, 2005, until the date of entry of judgment.”
“Windsor's application is therefore denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the motion for a protective order (Docket #38) is granted. Any deposition of Aly shall be conducted by videoconference.”
“the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket # 11) is granted”
“the plaintiff's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket # 23) is denied.”
“the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket# 28) is granted”
“Distefano's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket# 15) is denied.”
“Bonilla-Bukhari's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket # 18) is denied”
“the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket # 24) is granted.”
“the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket # 15) is granted.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The fixed availability sample consists entirely of terminated consent Social Security appeals filed from January through February 2018. It is useful for observing scheduling and Social Security outcomes but does not represent Gorenstein's broader civil caseload.
Put Judge Gorenstein's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Gorenstein actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Gorenstein's own signed orders and cites them.