Agarwal v. Milford Police Dept.
| Sandeep Agarwal |
| Milford Police Dept. and City Of Milford |
| 3:2022cv00312 |
| February 28, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Michael P Shea |
| Robert M Spector |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Robert M. Spector for Iintial Review Order including #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/29/22.Motions referred to Robert M. Spector(Johnson, D.)
|
|
Filing 11
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. SELF-REPRESENTED FILERS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE JUDGE'S STANDARD ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER WHICH IS ATTACHED. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/29/22.(Johnson, D.)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER. The #4 motion by self-represented litigant to participate in electronic filing is GRANTED. In addition, the #2 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the preparation of an Initial Review Order are hereby REFERRED to a Magistrate Judge.Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/29/2022. (Wong, Qing Wai)
|
| Filing 9 AMENDED COMPLAINT against City Of Milford, filed by Sandeep Agarwal.(Gould, K.) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER. The plaintiff brings a 1983 suit against the Milford Police Department but "a municipal police department is not a person subject to suit within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 1983." Conquistador v. Hartford Police Dept, No. 3:16-CV-151 (MPS), 2017 WL 969264, at *2 (D. Conn. Mar. 13, 2017). That is because the "Connecticut General Statutes contain no provision establishing municipal departments, including police departments, as legal entities separate and apart from the municipality they serve, or providing that they have the capacity to sue or be sued... Rather, pursuant to Connecticut enabling legislation, it is the municipality itself which possesses the capacity to sue and be sued." Rose v. City of Waterbury, No. 3:12CV291 VLB, 2013 WL 1187049, at *9 (D. Conn. Mar. 21, 2013) (citation omitted). If the plaintiff would like to file a proper 1983 suit, he must bring suit against the municipality or an individual, not the municipal police department. Thus, I grant the plaintiff leave to file an Amended Complaint with a proper defendant for a 1983 claim within 14 days of this order or risk dismissal. The plaintiff must list any defendant in the caption of his complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P 10(a) ("title of the complaint must name all the parties"). Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/14/2022. (Wong, Qing Wai)
|
|
Filing 7
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 2/28/2022. (Fanelle, N.)
|
|
Filing 6
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 2/28/2022. (Fanelle, N.)
|
|
Filing 5
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 4/29/2022 Discovery due by 8/30/2022 Dispositive Motions due by 10/4/2022 Signed by Clerk on 2/28/2022. (Fanelle, N.)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION by Self-Represented Litigant to Participate in Electronic Filing by Sandeep Agarwal. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 3 Consent to Electronic Notice by Sandeep Agarwal. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Sandeep Agarwal. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Milford Police Dept., filed by Sandeep Agarwal. (Fanelle, N.) |
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
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.
