Salten v. The County of Suffolk et al
Howard Salten |
The County of Suffolk, Suffolk County Police Department, Suffolk County Sheriffs' Department, Steve Levy, Thomas J. Spota, Christine Malafi, Richard Dormer, Salvatore Manno, Carol Erbis, Dennis Stewart, Michael Milton, Vincent F. Demarco and John/Jane Does 1-20 |
2:2008cv05294 |
January 29, 2009 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Civil Rights: Other Office |
Suffolk |
Sandra J. Feuerstein |
A. Kathleen Tomlinson |
Plaintiff |
Federal Question |
42:1981 Civil Rights |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 92 ORDER denying 90 Motion for Reconsideration. SO ORDERED that plaintiff's remaining arguments are without merit For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's motion for reconsideration or reargument is DENIED. CM to pro se plaintiff. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 8/6/2012. (Florio, Lisa) |
Filing 88 ORDER : This action is dismissed with prejudice, and the Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 10/19/2011. Copy mailed to pro se plaintiff. (Brienza, Lauren) |
Filing 19 ORDER re 17 Letter filed by Pro Se Plaintiff, denying Plaintiff's application for the reasons set forth herein. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Counsel for Defendants is directed to serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff Pro Se forthwith and to file proof of service on ECF. Ordered by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 8/5/2009. (Tobin, Ellen) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.