Fountain v. United States of America et al
Plaintiff: Cory R. Fountain
Defendant: United States of America, United States Department of Agriculture and Anwar M. Karim
Case Number: 8:2013cv00255
Filed: March 13, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Office: Plattsburgh Office
County: Clinton
Presiding Judge: Norman A. Mordue
Presiding Judge: Randolph F. Treece
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1346 Tort Claim
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
July 20, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 162 JUDGMENT in favor of United States Department of Agriculture against Cory R. Fountain. (khr)
July 19, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 161 MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED in Fountain v. United States of America, United States Department of Agriculture, and Karim (Fountain v. United States), 8:13-CV-255, that Karims cross-claim (Dkt. No. 52), seeking defense and indemnificatio n by the United States, and his motion/petition (Dkt. No. 55) demanding certification under 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(3), are dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; and it is further ORDERED that Karims motion (Dkt. No. 73) for declarator y judgment/certification in Fountain v. United States, 8:13-CV-255, and Karim v. United States of America and Thomas Vilsack as Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture (Karim v. United States), 3:14-CV-964, is denied without prej udice; and it is further ORDERED that the United States motion (Dkt. No. 75) for summary judgment is granted without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED that Fountains cross-motion (Dkt. No. 79) for partial summary judgment on the issue of liabil ity in Fountain v. United States, 8:13- CV-255, and Karim v. United States, 3:14-CV-964, is denied without prejudice to an action in New York State courts; and any relief Fountain seeks against the United States in either case is denied for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; and it is further ORDERED that the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Fountains state-law claims and they are dismissed without prejudice to an action in New York State courts; and it is further ORDERED that the actions Fountain v. United States, 8:13-CV-255, and Karim v. United States, 3:14-CV-964, are dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge Norman A. Mordue on 7/19/2018. (khr)
September 23, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 101 MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER. ORDERED that Karim's cross claim, Dkt. No. 52 , and his motion demanding certification, Dkt. No. 55 , are DENIED and dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; ORDERED that Karim's motion for declar atory judgment, Dkt. No. 73 , is DENIED; ORDERED that all claims against the United States and U.S. Department of Agriculture in 8:13-cv-255, are dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; and ORDERED that the United States' motion, Dkt . No. 75 , to dismiss 3:14-cv-964, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is GRANTED, and the case is dismissed in its entirety on the merits; ORDERED that Fountain's cross-motion, Dkt. No. 79 , for partial summary judgment in 8:13-cv-255, is DENIED without prejudice to an action in New York States courts; and any relief Fountain seeks against the United States in either 8:13-cv-255 or 3:14-cv-964 is DENIED with prejudice. ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close both cases. Signed by Senior Judge Norman A. Mordue on 9/23/2015. (lah)
September 30, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 59 DECISION and ORDER re 51 Status Report filed by United States of America and United States Department of Agriculture, 58 Response to Letter Brief filed by Anwar M. Karim. Karim seeks an additional deposition to support his petition and pr ospective motion for declaratory relief. The requested additional deposition pertains solely to the scope of employment. Determining the scope of employment here is a depositive decision which rests solely with a district judge as opposed to a magistrate judge. See Dkt. No. 50 . The Court DENIES Karim's application as premature and outside the Court's province to grant at this time. Signed by Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece on 9/30/2014. (lah)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fountain v. United States of America et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cory R. Fountain
Represented By: Robert S. Bruschini
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 ]
Defendant: United States of America
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 ]
Defendant: United States Department of Agriculture
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 ]
Defendant: Anwar M. Karim
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?