Reed v. Kavanewsky
| Doraine Reed |
| Kavanewsky |
| 3:2018cv01439 |
| August 23, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Michael P Shea |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER. In light of the plaintiff's failure to respond to the Court's orders 9 order to show cause, this case is hereby DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to close this case.Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 10/11/2018. (Self, A.)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER. The #2 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby GRANTED. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 10/11/2018. (Self, A.)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER. The Court has been informed that it is possible that the plaintiff never received a copy of its 7 order to show cause. As such, the Court hereby VACATES its 8 order. The plaintiff shall have 21 days from the date of this order to show cause as to why her complaint should not be dismissed in light of the concerns listed in the Court's 7 order; she may also choose to file an amended complaint within those 14 days that sets forth the specific facts supporting her claim and what relief she is seeking from the Court.The Clerk is hereby directed to send to the plaintiff by certified mail a copy of the Court's #6 , 7 . and 8 orders. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 9/12/2018.(Self, A.)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER. Given the plaintiff's failure to respond to the Court's 7 order, this case is hereby DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 9/12/2018. (Self, A.)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER. Upon review of the complaint, the Court is unable to discern the nature of the plaintiff's claims. The complaint therefore does not appear to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) ("a pleading that states a claim for relief must contain:... a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief."); Salahuddin v. Cuomo, 861 F.2d 40, 42 (2d Cir. 1988) (noting that a statement of claims in a complaint "should be plain because the principal function of pleadings under the Federal rules is to give the adverse party fair notice of the claim asserted so as to enable him to answer and prepare for trial"). Furthermore, inasmuch as the Court understands it, the complaint appears to set out a claim requesting that the Court interfere in an ongoing state court proceeding. This triggers two other concerns. First, the "Anti-Injunction Act provides that '[a] court of the United States may not grant an injunction to stay proceedings in a State court except as expressly authorized by Act of Congress, or where necessary in aid of its jurisdiction, or to protect or effectuate its judgments." Sierra v. City of New York, 528 F. Supp. 2d 465, 467 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (quoting 28 U.S.C. 2283). The plaintiff does not allege in her complaint that her claim falls under one of these exceptions to the general prohibition against federal courts interfering in ongoing State court proceedings. Second, under the abstention doctrine of Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), federal courts may not generally issue injunctions enjoining pending state prosecutions. See Schlagler v. Phillips, 166 F.3d 439, 442 (2d Cir. 1999). The plaintiff has not demonstrated that her claim or claims fall within one of the exceptions to Younger abstention. In light of these concerns, the plaintiff's #3 emergency motion for preliminary injunction is hereby DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Further, she shall have fourteen days from the date of this order to show cause as to why her complaint should not be dismissed in light of the concerns listed above; she may also choose to file an amended complaint within those 14 days that sets forth the specific facts supporting her claim and what relief she is seeking from the Court. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 8/23/2018. (Self, A.)
|
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 08/23/2018. (Peterson, M)
|
|
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 08/23/2018. (Peterson, M)
|
|
Filing 4
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 10/22/2018. Discovery due by 2/22/2019. Dispositive Motions due by 3/29/2019. Signed by Clerk on 08/23/2018. (Peterson, M)
|
| Filing 3 EMERGENCY MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Doraine Reed. Responses due by 9/13/2018 (Peterson, M) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Doraine Reed. (Peterson, M) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Kavanewsky, filed by Doraine Reed. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Peterson, M) |
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 Connecticut 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
| Search for this case: Reed v. Kavanewsky | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Kavanewsky | |
| 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: Doraine Reed | |
| 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.
