Andrew Hango v. George Atkinson,et al
| ANDREW HANGO |
| George ATKINSON, Lawrence Marcus, Wanda Royall, EPHRAIM MOORE, PAUL PICONE, Charlene Monroe and John Does 1-15 |
| George ATKINSON, Lawrence Marcus, Wanda Royall, EPHRAIM MOORE, PAUL PICONE, Charlene Monroe and John Does 1-15 |
| 1:2008cv03970 |
| September 29, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights Office |
| Outside home state |
| Carol B. Amon |
| James Orenstein |
| Defendant |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
209
MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying Plaintiff's 201 Motion for Reconsideration. The Clerk of Court is respectfully DIRECTED to mail a copy of this order by certified mail, return receipt requested, to pro se Plaintiff Andrew Hango at his address of record. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 5/13/2019. (c/m to pro se, certified mail receipt no. 7018 3090 0000 7858 2516) (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
|
Filing
191
ORDER, For the foregoing reasons. Plaintiff's motion for relief from judgment (Dkt. 171) is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully DIRECTED to mail a copy of this order by certified mail, return receipt requested, to pro se Plaintiff Andrew Hango at his address of record. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 6/1/2018. (c/m as directed, certified mail receipt no. 7011 2000 0000 4074 6943) (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
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.
