Almeida v. Fall River Police Station et al

Plaintiff: Jose A. Almeida
Defendant: Fall River Police Station, Joseph Zarroura and Bristol County District Attorney's Office
 
Case Number: 1:2012cv11476
Filed: July 30, 2012
 
Court: Massachusetts District Court
Office: Boston Office
County: Bristol
Presiding Judge: Patti B. Saris
 
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed#Document Text
October 25, 2012 14 Opinion or Order of the Court Judge Patti B. Saris: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: All claims against defendants Bristol District Attorney's office, the Fall River Police Station, Zarrora, Inc., and Bristol County's Government Agency are DISMISSED; The Clerk shal l issue a summons with respect to defendant Police Officer John Rose; and The Clerk shall send the summons, a copy of the amended complaint (Docket No. 11), and this Memorandum and Order to the plaintiff, who must thereafter serve the defendant in ac cordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). The plaintiff may elect to have service made by the United States Marshal Service. If directed by the plaintiff to do so, the United States Marshal Service shall serve the summonses, Complaint, an d this Memorandum and Order upon the defendant, in the manner directed by the plaintiff, with all costs of service to be advanced by the United States Marshal Service. Notwithstanding Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) and Local Rule 4.1, the plaintiff shall have 120 days from the date of this Order to complete service.(PSSA, 1)
January 22, 2013 21 Opinion or Order of the Court Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Plaintiff's Notice of Appeal (Docket No. 17) and his Clarified Amended Complaint (Docket No. 18) are CONSTRUED together as a Motion for Reconsideration of the dismissal of claims pursuant to the Memorandum and Order (Docket No. 14), and as a Motion for Leave to File a Clarified Amended Complaint; Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Docket Nos. 17 and 18) is DENIED; Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Clarifie d Amended Complaint (Docket Nos. 17 and 18) is DENIED; Plaintiff's Clarified Amended Complaint (Docket No. 18) is STRICKEN; and the operative pleading is the Amended Complaint (Docket No. 11); Plaintiff may not assert additional claims of retali ation and/or the denial of access to the courts in this action; should he wish to pursue those claims, he must file a separate action and pay the $350.00 filing fee or seek a waiver thereof in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915;Plaintiff must serve Officer Rose in accordance with the Memorandum and Order (Docket No. 14); failing which, this action will be dismissed; Plaintiff is PROHIBITED from filing any further amended or clarified complaints in this action without leave of court and h e may seek leave only after the defendant has filed a response to the amended complaint (Docket No. 11); and a Copy of this Memorandum and Order shall be TRANSMITTED to the First Circuit for whatever action regarding USCA No. 13-1028 it deems appropriate in light of this Courts construction of the Notice of Appeal and Clarified Amended Complaint as a Motion for Reconsideration of the dismissal of claims as set forth in the Memorandum and Order (Docket No. 14).(PSSA, 1)
February 19, 2013 28 Opinion or Order of the Court Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: to the extent that Almeida's Letter (Docket No. 23) again seeks reconsideration of the October 25, 2012 Memorandum and Order (Docket No. 14) and/or reconsideration of the further Memorandum and Order (Docket No. 21), his request is DENIED. Almeida is PROHIBITED from seeking further reconsideration in this Court until after Officer Rose has been served and has filed a responsive pleading in this case. For the reasons previously set forth by this Court, Almeida is PROHIBITED from filing any further Clarified Amended Complaints absent leave of Court, upon a duly-filed motion with good cause shown, and only after Officer Rose has filed a responsive pleading. (PSSA, 1)
December 9, 2013 39 Opinion or Order of the Court Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered: Plaintiff's Motion to File a Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 37) is ALLOWED. The Second Amended Complaint contained in Docket No. 37, pages 11-59 shall constitute the operative plea ding in this action. No further amendments shall be permitted; Plaintiff's claims arising under: (1) Bivens; (2) the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights; (3) the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act; (4) the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act; (5) the  67; 1983 malicious prosecution claims grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment;(6) the false imprisonment claim; and (7) the false arrest claim, are DISMISSED sua sponte for failure to state claims upon which relief may be granted; andThe only remaining claim is the § 1983 malicious prosecution claim grounded in the Fourth Amendment; Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 10) is DENIED without prejudice; Any Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint shall be filed within 14 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order. (PSSA, 1)
August 13, 2012 6 Opinion or Order of the Court Judge Patti B. Saris: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered: Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Docket No. 2) is ALLOWED and the filing fee is assessed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b); Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Docket No. 3) is DENIED; Plaintiff's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Testificandum (Docket No. 4) is DENIED; and This action shall be dismissed within 42 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order unless plaintiff demonstrates good cause in writing, including legal authority, why his claims should not be dismissed for the reasons stated herein. (PSSA, 1)
September 18, 2012 9 Opinion or Order of the Court Judge Patti B. Saris: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered: Plaintiff's second Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Docket No. 8) is DENIED; and this action shall be dismissed within 28 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order unless plaintiff demonstrates good cause in writing, including legal authority, why his claims should not be dismissed for the reasons stated herein. (PSSA, 1)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Search for this case: Almeida v. Fall River Police Station et al
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jose A. Almeida
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Fall River Police Station
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Joseph Zarroura
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Bristol County District Attorney's Office
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]