Gordon v. City of New York et al
| Karlene A. Gordon |
| City of New York, Carmen S. Ruiz, Administration for Children's Services and John and Jane Doe |
| 1:2009cv04577 |
| October 23, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Kings |
| Marilyn D. Go |
| Edward R. Korman |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
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
107
ORDER granting 93 Motion for Summary Judgment. I grant the City's motion for summary judgment as to Ms. Gordon's § 1983 malicious prosecution claim. I decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over her remaining state-law claims and dismiss them without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); Valencia ex rel. Franco v. Lee, 316 F.3d 299, 304-06 (2d Cir. 2003). Ordered by Judge Edward R. Korman on 7/22/2016. (Ellis, Tristan) (c/m)
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER granting 24 Motion for Settlement Enforcement; adopting in part and rejecting in part 59 Report and Recommendations. Because I find that Mr. Barango-Tariah had actual authority to enter into the October 28 settlement agreement, and that the agreement, as memorialized in the stipulation of settlement, is binding on plaintiff, defendants' motion to enforce the settlement is granted. Ordered by Judge Edward R. Korman on 3/31/2015. (Kaye, Julia)
|
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.
