Kitt v. State of New York

Kitt v. State of New York

Plaintiff:	Zachary Kitt
Defendant:	State of New York
Case Number:	1:2013cv05571
Filed:	October 7, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge:	Dora Lizette Irizarry
Presiding Judge:	Cheryl L. Pollak
Nature of Suit:	Mandamus & Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 9, 2014	Filing 29 ORDER granting 13 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, this action is dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff is further denied a certificate of appealability as he fai ls to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Lucidore v. New York State Div. of Parole, 2 09 F. 3d 107, 112 (2d Cir. 2000). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. S ee Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Memorandum and Order to pro se plaintiff and to close this case. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 9/9/2014. (Irizarry, Dora)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 9, 2014

Filing 29 ORDER granting 13 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, this action is dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff is further denied a certificate of appealability as he fai ls to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Lucidore v. New York State Div. of Parole, 2 09 F. 3d 107, 112 (2d Cir. 2000). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. S ee Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Memorandum and Order to pro se plaintiff and to close this case. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 9/9/2014. (Irizarry, Dora)

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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kitt v. State of New York
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: State of New York
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Zachary Kitt
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?