Kennedy v. City of Albany et al
Tiara Kennedy |
City of Albany, Paul E. Kirwin and John Doe 1 and 2 |
1:2015cv00491 |
April 24, 2015 |
US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
Albany Office |
Albany |
Mae A. D'Agostino |
Christian F. Hummel |
Other Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 21 MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 10 Motion to Dismiss: The Court hereby ORDERS that the Defendants' motion to dismiss pursuant to rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is GRANTED with regard to (1) Plaintiff's section 1983 claims against Defendant Kirwin in his official capacity (2) Plaintiff's section 1983 claims for punitive damages against the City of Albany, and (3) Plaintiff's claims for violations of due process r ights under the Fifth Amendment; and the Court further ORDERS that Defendants' motion to dismiss pursuant to rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure is DENIED without prejudice with regard to Plaintiff's state law claims for assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false arrest; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Memorandum- Decision and Order on all parties in accordance with the Local Rules. Signed by U.S. District Judge Mae A. D'Agostino on 10/22/15. (ban) |
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 Northern 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.