Brown v. Pete et al
||Joseph Pete, Curtis Cinelli and Thomas Brown
||September 10, 2012
||Massachusetts District Court
||Mark L. Wolf
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|January 8, 2013
Judge Joseph L. Tauro: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered: Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in Court (Docket No. 3), and his Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Docket No. 4)are DENIED without prejudice; Within 21 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Plaintiff shall file a renewed Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis signed under the penalties of perjury, or this action may be dismissed; Within 35 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Plaintiff shall demon strate good cause in writing why his claims against Sheriff Thomas Brown should not be dismissed; Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Docket No. 2) is DENIED without prejudice to renew after the Defendants have filed a response to the Complaint; Upon resolution of the filing fee issue, an Order shall enter directing the issuance of summonses as to Defendants Lt. Joseph Pete of the Department of Correction Fugitive Apprehension Unit in Milford, Massachusetts, and Trooper Curtis C inelli of the Massachusetts State Police; and If Plaintiff is permitted to proceed in forma pauperis, an Order shall enter directing the United States Marshal Service to effect service of process, and to advance the costs of service. (PSSA, 1)[Remark: IFP form sent with copy of Memorandum and Order, copy of the Complaint (per plaintiff's request on January 2, 2013) and docket sheet].
|June 25, 2013
Ch. Magistrate Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 36 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Joseph Pepe. Recommendation: The motion to dismiss should be ALLOWED with respect to defendant Pepe, and th e claims against him should be DISMISSED without prejudice to the plaintiff refiling them after he has administratively exhausted them; the claims against defendants Cinelli and Brown should be DISMISSED without prejudice to the plaintiff refiling them in the proper venue. (Objections to R&R due by 7/9/2013). ORDER entered denying 45 MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Manson Brown. (Robinson, Amy)
|July 17, 2013
Judge Joseph L. Tauro: ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS entered. After considering the parties Objections 58 , 59 , this court ACCEPTS and ADOPTSthe June 25, 2013, Report and Recommendation 55 of Chief Magistrate Judge Sorokin. For the re asons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, this court hereby orders that: Defendant Pepe's Motion to Dismiss 36 , as joined by Defendants Cinelli and Brown at the June 21 Status Conference, is ALLOWED. Plaintiffs Motion to Appoint Counsel 45 is DENIED. This case is CLOSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Geraldino-Karasek, Clarilde)
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.
Access this case on the Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.