Justice v. Kuhnapfel
Plaintiff: Brenda Justice
Defendant: Richard Kuhnapfel
Case Number: 1:2013cv00659
Filed: February 1, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: Margo K. Brodie
Presiding Judge: Robert M. Levy
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
May 29, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 79 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: The Court grants Kuhnapfel's 55 motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and dismisses, sua sponte, the Amended Complaint as to Holm e. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. SO ORDERED by Judge Margo K. Brodie on 5/29/2014. C/mailed to pro se Petitioner. (Forwarded for Judgment.) (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
November 18, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 52 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: Plaintiff's 33 motion to appoint counsel is denied. Plaintiff's 33 motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot. SO ORDERED by Judge Margo K. Brodie, on 11/18/2013. C/mailed. (See document for details.) (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
November 5, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 50 MEMORANDUM & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Having considered Magistrate Judge Levy's 43 Report & Recommendation ("R&R") and the accompanying objections, the Court adopts the R&R in its entirety. The Plaintiff's motions for preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order are denied. SO ORDERED by Judge Margo K. Brodie, on 11/5/2013. C/mailed to pro se Plaintiff. (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
April 22, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 17 MEMORANDUM & OPINION: Accordingly, all claims against defendants Judge Armstrong and Liz Beal are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption to reflect the dismissal of these defendants. Plaintiff's false arrest claim shall proceed against Defendants Kuhnapfel and Holme. The United States Marshal Service is directed to serve the summons, Complaint, the Court's 2/22/2013 Order, Amended Complaint and th is Order upon Defendants Kuhnapfel and Holme without prepayment of fees. A courtesy copy of the same papers shall be mailed to the Corporation Counsel for the City of New York. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.c. § 1915(a)(3) that any ap peal would not be taken in good faith and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of any appeal.SO ORDERED by Judge Margo K. Brodie, on 4/22/2013. Copy of this Order sent to pro se Plaintiff and Corporation Counsel via first class mail. (Parties: Judge Armstrong and Liz Beal terminated.) (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Justice v. Kuhnapfel
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Richard Kuhnapfel
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: Brenda Justice
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?